Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Human Factors
Expecting a visual to 17 we were 20 miles out and direct to PNS. A scattered layer at 2000 MSL was obstructing our view so I asked approach control for direct to BRENT. Approach control gave us direct BRENT and descend to 1700 MSL. On a right base direct BRENT the FO said he spotted a beacon; but I still couldn't see it thinking the layer was the reason. I had listened to the ASOS and noted pilot controlled lighting was on CTAF but forgot to click the lights on using COMM2. We were slowed to 160 kts with Flaps 3 and gear down as we approached 3 miles from BRENT. Approach told us field at 2 o'clock; I replied still searching. Approach gave us a 140 heading to join. This had us going inside BRENT at 1700 MSL. The FO stated; 'Oh; the runway lights are off'. I scrambled to click the lights on with COMM2 but had 119.1 tuned in. The FO disengaged the AP pitched the nose down to remain on glide path while I was doing this. We were not cleared for an approach however. We lost 150 to 200 feet of altitude. Approach control told us; 'Low altitude alert' and gave us a left turn heading 090. We corrected back to 1700 MSL. We were vectored back around for the ILS but by now had the lights on and the runway in sight.Both the FO and I remarked during the descent that we could feel the lateness of the night and were fighting to remain alert. We think this contributed to the event. ATC turning us inside final while holding 1700 ft MSL was not a help. The FO's reaction was to start descending to capture the glide path because he knew otherwise we would be too high. But because we were neither cleared for a visual or the ILS; we should have remained at 1700. I had my focus on the box correcting a frequency and clicking on lights when I should have accomplished that a while ago so I could maintain situational awareness at a critical time. Taking the initiative to activate runway lights early on instead of waiting to see the airport beacon would have given us the visual in time. Also asking for a vector to join outside of the FAF would buy more time to see the airport and control the lighting.
After thinking about the events the causes were the runway lights being off and my failure to recognize a slight descent. The pilot monitoring thought she was clicking them on but the frequency was off by one digit. Also; I should have left the autopilot on until we were cleared the approach to assure we didn't drift down. Task saturation as well as trying to find the runway (eyes outside) probably led me to not noticing a loss of altitude prior to being cleared the visual. Both crew members noted prior to descent that we were beginning to feel the effects of a long day with multiple weather delays and deviations. Finally the turn inside the final approach fix only exacerbated the situation by giving us less time. In the future this situation can be mitigated by a more detailed brief describing the additional actions necessary for a closed runway; also if I had left the autopilot on the plane would not have drifted down. I also would not have accepted the heading that cut us inside the final approach fix and instead asked for a vector away. ATC informed us on our vectors to the ILS that he could see that the lights were not on. It would have been nice to have been told this information sooner considering he knew we were having trouble finding the runway and we thought we were clicking the lights on.
Air carrier flight crew reported difficulties during a night visual approach to PNS due to the runway lights not being activated via mic clicks. A low altitude alert was issued by ATC and the flight was vectored back around for another attempt.