B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 150; Flight Crew Total 20000; Flight Crew Type 5000
Situational Awareness
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Human Factors; Procedure
Misidentified Runway on Approach MIA 26L.MIA ATIS advised that RNAV APP 26L was in use. RWY 26L ILS and Localizer were out of service. RWY 26R was advised closed on ATIS NOTAM. On contacting MIA Approach MIA ATC was giving visual approaches.On right base RWY26L ATC asked us to report RWY in sight. FO (First Officer) advised; 'Runway NOT yet in sight.' Approach ATC said; 'Roger that let me know when you have it in sight.' FO replied; 'Wilco.' Just after that Captain and FO sighted bright RWY lights and bright PAPI lights and reported the runway in sight; as we were turning final Runway 26L. It seems like the lights came on seconds after we advised the approach controller that we did not have the runway in sight. It was as if the controller was helping us to get a clear visual sighting of the runway.ATC cleared [us] for the visual approach 26L and we followed the bright PAPI and were visual with the bright runway lights. Given that 26R was advised by ATIS as being closed; and we had just advised ATC of not having the runway in sight; it was not unreasonable to assume the one visible runway and PAPI was 26L. The FAA rules state that runway edge lights and PAPI shall not be used when the runway is closed. As it turns out the Runway 26L runway edge lights and PAPI were on a dim setting. 26R runway lights and PAPI were on a bright setting. With 2 operating runways one would expect to see 2 runways at equal lighting intensity. With one runway closed one would expect to see one runway; i.e. the open one; or 2 runways at equal lighting intensity. One would not expect to see PAPI on a runway not in use.FAA Order Air Traffic Control JO7110.65V Section 4 Airport Lighting StatesPRECISION APPROACH PATH INDICATORS (PAPI) PAPI systems with remote on/off switching shall be operated when they serve the runway in use and where intensities are controlled.The basic FAA standard for PAPI systems permits independent operation by means of photoelectric device. This system has no on/off control feature and is intended for continuous operation. Other PAPI systems in use include those that are operated remotely from the control tower. These systems may consist of either a photoelectric intensity control with only an on/off switch; or a five-step intensity system. REFERENCE FAAO 6850.2; Visual Guidance Lighting Systems3-4-10. RUNWAY EDGE LIGHTS e. Do not turn on the runway edge lights when a NOTAM closing the runway is in effect. REFERENCEFAAO JO 7110.65; Para 3-4-15; Simultaneous Approach and Runway Edge Light Operation. FAAO JO 7210.3; Para 10-6-3; Incompatible Light System Operation. FAAO JO 7210.3; Para 10-6-9; Runway Edge Lights Associated With Medium Approach Light System/Runway Alignment Indicator Lights. To the north of the brightly lit runway was black which is consistent with 26R being closed and having the lights off. Lights on 26L were on dim and barely visible; certainly not standing out like the lights on 26R. (We had just advised that we did not have the runway in sight.) Neither pilot recalls seeing Approach lights; and if they were on; they would have been on dim. LNAV showed the acft on LNAV track for RNAV GPS APP 26L.[The Company] Operating Manual 747 states that the tolerance for RNP is 0.3 for GNSS or GPS. (This equals 0.3 x 6080 which is 1824 feet). The distance between Runway 26L and 26R as measured from the KMIA/MIA Jeppesen Airport Chart is approximately 600 ft. This is well within the NAV tolerance of 0.3)Captain then selected LNAV and followed the LNAV track for a brief time; showing the aircraft on track; and also visually we were aligned with the runway. At ten miles on a visual approach; the visible lights on 26R are well within the NAV tolerance of 0.3 as above; and the runway appeared directly on track. Then we continued visually following the lights of 26R. Given the high intensity of the 26R lights; this made the 26L lights appear to be general airport lighting; taxiway lighting etc. Over 95% of the time in such a situation one would have the 26L Localizer or ILS available but this was out of service.On short final ATC advised [us] to go around. At no time did ATC advise us that the runway lights and PAPIS were on for Rwy 26R; and furthermore were on a brighter setting than that active runway 26L. [We] went around and landed on 26L without incident. After landing I telephoned TRACON Supervisor of Miami Tower and on early Monday morning telephoned the ATC Quality Assurance manager in Miami Tower and they advised that the runway lights were on maintenance test settings at the request of Dade County; the owner of the airport.In summary; the Runway edge lights on 26R an adjacent closed runway 600 feet distant were on a brighter setting than the runway in use Twy26L. This is contrary to FAAO JO 7110.65; Para 3-4-10. The PAPIs on 26R an adjacent closed runway 600 feet distant were on a brighter setting than the runway in use Twy26L. This is contrary to FAAO JO 7110.65; Para 3-4-4. Neither crew member remembers seeing any approach lights; and if they were; they were on dim. The dimmer runway lights of 26L when visible made it look like they were part of the airport environs. At no time did the approach controller or control tower advise [us] that the 26R runway edge lights or 26R PAPIs were on; or that they were on maintenance; or on a brighter setting than the runway in use. ATIS advised that the Runway 26R was closed. [We] tracked 10 miles on approach to 26R and the Tower controller did not notice this until short final despite the airport being equipped with Airport Surface Detection Equipment ASDE-X (Airport Surface Detection Equipment Model X); and our aircraft being fitted with ADS-B and transponder. On short final the Tower Controller mistakenly advised [another aircraft] to go around; before correcting himself to call [us] to go around. Had the ILS or Localizer been available there would have been a good back up track to align with on final; and these NAVAIDs are normally available. No Brasher Warning Notification was issued.To prevent this ATC should at all times advise pilots when Runway lights; PAPIs and other are going to be on test on closed runways; and any time runway lighting on a non-active runway is put on a higher setting than the active runway. This incident has many of the similarities that occurred in the accident of [an air carrier] at Taipei where the runway lights were on; on a closed runway. Always have Localizer or ILS available for an active runway. Controllers should monitor the progress of ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast) aircraft on their screens which must give accurate position updates; or get such equipment installed so that the controller can quickly pick up an aircraft lined up for the wrong runway. Even for visual approaches. Program radar software to identify an aircraft that is not aligned with the correct runway that detects an aircraft aligned with a closed runway; or one being used only for takeoffs. Program ground lighting equipment switching to issue an alert or warning on ASDE-X or ATIS whenever there is a difference in lighting intensities on close adjacent runways. Advise that runway lighting testing is in progress whenever this is the case; leading to non-standard lighting settings.
B747 Captain reported lining up at night for a closed runway at MIA because the runway lights were brighter on that runway than on the parallel open runway.