Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Time Pressure
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
My First Officer (Pilot Monitoring) and I (Pilot flying) flew to Bogota; Columbia (BOG).  This was the first time for either of us to fly into Bogota.  During our 3+ hour transit to BOG; the FO (First Officer) and I had a very long discussion about the specifics of the airport.  About an hour from landing; ATC said that BOG was using Runways 13L/13R ILS approaches; which we were happy to hear; because we had a few questions explained below about the non-ILS approaches for Runways 31L/31R.  No ILS approaches were available for Runway 31. Once we checked in with Bogota; we were told to fly the ISVAT 3W Arrival for Runway 31L; which surprised us because we had been told to expect Runway 13.  The Jeppesen approach charts have 5 approaches for Runway 31L; although 3 of those approaches (RNP Z/Y/X Rwy 31L (AR)) are specifically not allowed to be flown by [our aircraft type].  Of the two remaining approaches listed in the Jeppesen; pages; only one;'RNP Visual Flight Proc RNP C Rwy 31L'; was available to us in the FMS (Flight Management System).  So our primary question was is the 'RNP Visual Flight Proc RNP C Rwy 31L' an instrument approach; or is it a visual approach?  Based on a simulator training event several years ago; I distinctly remember a Check Airman telling me that [company] pilots are not allowed to fly visual approaches at night.  I searched the Flight Operations Manual (FOM) for 'night visual approaches' and found nothing.  While on the arrival; a search for just 'visual approaches' yielded 28 results; a daunting number; given we were two pilots who had never been to BOG; it was late at night and we were descending on the arrival into mountainous terrain to a field at 8;400 foot elevation.  In an effort to decide whether IMC or Visual Approach rules applied; I decided that this had to be classified as a visual approach; not an instrument approach; since page 10-7B-1 lists our only available approach to 31L under the category of Visual Approach Procedures.  Finally; in the FOM; I found a one-sentence reference to visual approaches at night which states: 'At night; since obstacles may not be visible; do not accept or request visual approaches unless the airport is clearly in sight and the flight crew is certain of remaining clear of obstacles and terrain while maneuvering for landing.'  During the time we were flying the arrival; we were above an overcast and the field was not in sight; so we quickly discussed the possibility of having to divert. At some point well after we transitioned from the arrival to the approach at AMVES; the runway environment came into sight.  At that point I thought we could continue the approach; as we were down in the valley and could maintain sight of the field.  As we approached the 31L Final Approach Fix (BO480); we were fully configured for landing and Tower asked us if we would prefer to land on Runway 31R.  We said no; since we were already set up for Runway 31L.  Then Tower told us that Runway 31L was 'now closed' (and the runway edge lights and centerline lights were turned off) and that we had to land on Runway 31R.  My concern now was that we would no longer be on the coded purple FMS path to landing because we couldn't reprogram the FMS in such a short time; and I was unfamiliar with the terrain in the area.  The FO and I quickly referenced the terrain on our cockpit displays and decided that we would be clear of any terrain while I transitioned to 31R.  So I disconnected the autopilot and flew over to the 31R center line.  Another challenge was that we were initially on the PAPI glide path for 31L; and once we transitioned to 31R PAPI; were instantly high because 31R is offset about 4;000 feet closer to us than 31L.  But I was able to get the airplane stabilized on PAPI glide path before we reached 1;000 feet AGL; and we landed successfully on 31R.Of the many lessons learned from this flight; two things stand out to me. First; the 10-7 pages need a better discussion of visual approaches at night.  The fact that the title of the approach is 'RNP Visual Flight Proc RNP C Rwy 31L' (which sounds like an RNAV approach since RNP is listed twice in the title).  Second; the actions of Bogota Tower to close 31L Runway at such a late stage in our approach was totally unnecessary and inexcusable. Insufficient discussion in 10-7 pages regarding Runway 31 visual approaches at night.  Also; why Bogota Tower closed Runway 31L and shut off runway lights when we were in vicinity of Final Approach Fix and required us to transition to Runway 31R. Improve discussion regarding night visual approaches in 10-7 pages and query Bogota Tower why they closed the runway on us passing Final Approach Fix; requiring us to deviate from coded FMS path in mountainous terrain.
An air carrier pilot conducting an approach at night to SKBO reported they were cleared for a 'RNP Visual Flight Proc.' approach but charts and the Flight Manual were not clear if they were authorized to fly this procedure.