Narrative:

We were vectored for the ILS approach into clinton, ia, by quad city approach. Conditions were 500 ft overcast and 2 mi visibility according to the AWOS. There is no control tower and it was still dark at XX45 am. Quad city gave us a final vector and cleared us for the approach and also instructed us to cancel the IFR with him or to contact quad city on the ground at clinton on frequency 118.5. Our descent and approach checklist was complete standing by for landing flaps at the marker. We had discussed the approach and the missed approach procedure. We both had studied the approach and both pilots have landed at clinton before, but never at night. I was the PNF and had the commercial book on my lap, open to the ILS page. At my 500 ft above callout I had ground contact, good forward visibility and what I thought was a beacon but no airport or runway. After another 100 ft descent I still wasn't sure what I was looking at until I realized there were no lights on the runway. I thought they must have pilot controled lighting and switched to unicom frequency, keyed the microphone and nothing happened. I had to turn the overhead light on to read the plate while the PF continued descent to 200 ft above. I took a while to find the airport plan form page and realized that the quad city approach frequency was also the pilot controled lighting frequency, I switched to 118.5 and clicked the microphone and the lights came on. The PF was just about to miss the approach when I said 'runway' and he went visual and landed. Why didn't quad city advise us of pilot controled lighting. Why couldn't they have the ability to turn the lights on? Why is the control frequency different than unicom like it is at most airports? This truly was our fault, but it's kind of like a test that we failed and now let's create a potentially dangerous situation. Yes, this information is on the plan form but come on, something like this should also be noted right on the ILS plate. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states the aircraft was a king air, BE350. His chief pilot was flying with him so the company knows of the situation. He has not personally contacted the commercial chart publishers as he knows they are going through format changes and is waiting to see if they do change this. Since most pilot controled lighting is on the unicom he worked hard to get some response on that frequency. He then had to look elsewhere. Kind of tough at night and so close in. This corporation operation uses many non tower airports and all others have the pilot controled lighting on the unicom frequency. A callback was made to chart company regarding their format used for displaying pilot lighting frequencys. A specialist there advised that they do not list the frequency on the approach chart, but only on the airport diagram. He was aware of the nos format, but said they had no plans to change their format.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CORPORATE ACFT MAKES DSCNT TO ARPT WITH PLT CTLED LIGHTING WHICH IS ON APCH FREQ AND NOT UNICOM AS IS NORMAL.

Narrative: WE WERE VECTORED FOR THE ILS APCH INTO CLINTON, IA, BY QUAD CITY APCH. CONDITIONS WERE 500 FT OVCST AND 2 MI VISIBILITY ACCORDING TO THE AWOS. THERE IS NO CTL TWR AND IT WAS STILL DARK AT XX45 AM. QUAD CITY GAVE US A FINAL VECTOR AND CLRED US FOR THE APCH AND ALSO INSTRUCTED US TO CANCEL THE IFR WITH HIM OR TO CONTACT QUAD CITY ON THE GND AT CLINTON ON FREQ 118.5. OUR DSCNT AND APCH CHKLIST WAS COMPLETE STANDING BY FOR LNDG FLAPS AT THE MARKER. WE HAD DISCUSSED THE APCH AND THE MISSED APCH PROC. WE BOTH HAD STUDIED THE APCH AND BOTH PLTS HAVE LANDED AT CLINTON BEFORE, BUT NEVER AT NIGHT. I WAS THE PNF AND HAD THE COMMERCIAL BOOK ON MY LAP, OPEN TO THE ILS PAGE. AT MY 500 FT ABOVE CALLOUT I HAD GND CONTACT, GOOD FORWARD VISIBILITY AND WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A BEACON BUT NO ARPT OR RWY. AFTER ANOTHER 100 FT DSCNT I STILL WASN'T SURE WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT UNTIL I REALIZED THERE WERE NO LIGHTS ON THE RWY. I THOUGHT THEY MUST HAVE PLT CTLED LIGHTING AND SWITCHED TO UNICOM FREQ, KEYED THE MIKE AND NOTHING HAPPENED. I HAD TO TURN THE OVERHEAD LIGHT ON TO READ THE PLATE WHILE THE PF CONTINUED DSCNT TO 200 FT ABOVE. I TOOK A WHILE TO FIND THE ARPT PLAN FORM PAGE AND REALIZED THAT THE QUAD CITY APCH FREQ WAS ALSO THE PLT CTLED LIGHTING FREQ, I SWITCHED TO 118.5 AND CLICKED THE MIKE AND THE LIGHTS CAME ON. THE PF WAS JUST ABOUT TO MISS THE APCH WHEN I SAID 'RWY' AND HE WENT VISUAL AND LANDED. WHY DIDN'T QUAD CITY ADVISE US OF PLT CTLED LIGHTING. WHY COULDN'T THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO TURN THE LIGHTS ON? WHY IS THE CTL FREQ DIFFERENT THAN UNICOM LIKE IT IS AT MOST ARPTS? THIS TRULY WAS OUR FAULT, BUT IT'S KIND OF LIKE A TEST THAT WE FAILED AND NOW LET'S CREATE A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SIT. YES, THIS INFO IS ON THE PLAN FORM BUT COME ON, SOMETHING LIKE THIS SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED RIGHT ON THE ILS PLATE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THE ACFT WAS A KING AIR, BE350. HIS CHIEF PLT WAS FLYING WITH HIM SO THE COMPANY KNOWS OF THE SIT. HE HAS NOT PERSONALLY CONTACTED THE COMMERCIAL CHART PUBLISHERS AS HE KNOWS THEY ARE GOING THROUGH FORMAT CHANGES AND IS WAITING TO SEE IF THEY DO CHANGE THIS. SINCE MOST PLT CTLED LIGHTING IS ON THE UNICOM HE WORKED HARD TO GET SOME RESPONSE ON THAT FREQ. HE THEN HAD TO LOOK ELSEWHERE. KIND OF TOUGH AT NIGHT AND SO CLOSE IN. THIS CORPORATION OP USES MANY NON TWR ARPTS AND ALL OTHERS HAVE THE PLT CTLED LIGHTING ON THE UNICOM FREQ. A CALLBACK WAS MADE TO CHART COMPANY REGARDING THEIR FORMAT USED FOR DISPLAYING PLT LIGHTING FREQS. A SPECIALIST THERE ADVISED THAT THEY DO NOT LIST THE FREQ ON THE APCH CHART, BUT ONLY ON THE ARPT DIAGRAM. HE WAS AWARE OF THE NOS FORMAT, BUT SAID THEY HAD NO PLANS TO CHANGE THEIR FORMAT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.