JAR OPS Minimum Runway Lighting/PAPI Requirement

[Statorblade]

Trying to find out if there is anything written in JAR OPS about whether a PAPI is required for dispatch to an airport where (for example) the nav aids are all temporarily unserviceable. ie Is it acceptable under JAR OPS to plan for a "no slope guidance" approach.

How about percentages of runway lights in the above scenario that may be unserviceable for dispatch and subsequent night arrival ?

Any thoughts ?

[His dudeness]

According to the JAROPS 1 German version, you´d need to have RWY-edgelights, Thresholdlights and Endlights SWITCHED on....doesn´t say what percentage you´d need. (for nighttime)

PAPI is required ONLY when GS is more than 4°.
(Attachment1 to JAROPS 1.430)

"No slope guidance" perfectly okay WITHOUT PAPI - if less than 4° slope.

Beware: raised minimas apply if Lighting is less than complete.
However, PAPI doesn´t make a difference.

[Miles Magister]

SB

There are no JAR-OPS restrictions on lighting for day VFR ops. The restrictions only come in with LVP Ops or night. AMC OPS 1.430 is reproduced below. I am sorry but I am not technically clever enough to paste the tables in, but they basically imply that if you have a pilot's licence you should be good enough to judge an approach without guidance.

You may find that your own national rules apply. For instance in the UK you must have specific approval to operate an aircraft above 5, 700 Kgs MTOW into an airfield with no IFR approach aids on public transport.

AMC OPS 1.430(b)(4)
Effect on Landing Minima of temporarily failed or downgraded Ground Equipment
See JAR-OPS 1.430(b)(4)
1 Introduction
1.1 This AMC provides operators with instructions for flight crews on the effects on landing minima of
temporary failures or downgrading of ground equipment.
1.2 Aerodrome facilities are expected to be installed and maintained to the standards prescribed in
ICAO Annexes 10 and 14. Any deficiencies are expected to be repaired without unnecessary delay.
2 General. These instructions are intended for use both pre-flight and in-flight. It is not expected
however that the commander would consult such instructions after passing the outer marker or equivalent
position. If failures of ground aids are announced at such a late stage, the approach could be continued at
the commander’s discretion. If, however, failures are announced before such a late stage in the approach,
their effect on the approach should be considered as described in Tables 1A and 1B below, and the
approach may have to be abandoned to allow this to happen.
3 Operations with no Decision Height (DH)
3.1 An operator should ensure that, for aeroplanes authorised to conduct no DH operations with the
lowest RVR limitations, the following applies in addition to the content of Tables 1A and 1B, below:
i. RVR. At least one RVR value must be available at the aerodrome;
ii. Runway lights
a. No runway edge lights, or no centre lights – Day – RVR 200 m; Night – Not allowed;
b. No TDZ lights – No restrictions;
c. No standby power to runway lights – Day – RVR 200 m; Night – not allowed.
4. Conditions applicable to Tables 1A & 1B
i. Multiple failures of runway lights other than indicated in Table 1B are not acceptable.
ii. Deficiencies of approach and runway lights are treated separately.
iii. Category II or III operations. A combination of deficiencies in runway lights and RVR assessment
equipment is not allowed.
iv. Failures other than ILS affect RVR only and not DH.
ACJ/AMC/IEM E — ALL WEATHER OPERATIONS

MM