LNDG WITH RWY LIGHTS INOP.

Narrative

THE WX WAS CLR; VISIBILITY WAS UNLIMITED AND IT WAS DUSK. RWY 14 AT ANC INTL WAS ACTIVE ON ATIS. ANOTHER ACFT LANDED A FEW MINS BEFORE US ON RWY 14. RWY 14 HAD THE LAST 500 FT NOTAMED CLOSED FOR SOME TIME DUE TO RWY CONSTRUCTION. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH AND CLRED TO LAND BY THE TWR. OTHER TFC WAS ON DOWNWIND FOR AN INTERSECTING RWY 24. THE TFC WAS A FLT OF 2. I ASSUMED ONE WAS A NORDO. WE TURNED FINAL TO RWY 14 RIGHT ON THE VASI. AT SOMEWHERE LESS THAN 200 FT THE FO NOTICED THE RWY DIDN'T SEEM VERY WELL LIGHTED. TWR WAS TALKING TO OTHER TFC (FLT OF 2). AFTER HE FINISHED; I SAID 'LIGHTS.' HE COMMENTED; 'OH; THEY'RE NOT ON.' SINCE IT WAS NOT TOTALLY DARK AND WE COULD SEE THE LENGTH OF RWY I TOLD THE FO TO CONTINUE AND LAND. HE DID. LNDG AND ROLLOUT WERE NORMAL. EXECUTING A GAR WOULD OF PUT US CLOSE TO TFC IN THE DOWNWIND ONE OF WHICH I BELIEVED WAS A 'NORDO.' I FELT PERFECTLY CONFIDENT LNDG ON THE RWY; IN FACT I FELT IT WAS A SAFER MANEUVER THAN EXECUTING A GAR AT LESS THAN 100 FT. AFTER LNDG; FO AND I DISCUSSED SIT. LEGALLY A GAR MAY HAVE BEEN MORE PRUDENT. ALSO SINCE CONSTRUCTION WAS IN PROGRESS EARLIER IN THE DAY A GAR MAY HAVE BEEN A BETTER CHOICE. SINCE IT WAS ONLY DUSK AND WE COULD SEE THE LENGTH OF THE RWY AND THAT IT WAS CLR WE FELT SAFE. CERTAIN TYPES OF UNLIT EQUIP MAY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO BE SEEN THOUGH. THE TWR CLOSED THE RWY AND SENT AN ELECTRICIAN TO INSPECT THE LIGHTS AFTER WE LANDED. IT APPEARS IT WAS JUST AN ELECTRICAL FAILURE.