Narrative:

After finishing practicing maneuvers, my student (a CFI candidate) and I came back early to practice lndgs on the sod runway 05 at ksu. After successfully completing 2 full stop lndgs, we turned again to depart 05. After joining the downwind for 05, the airplane was slow and low (encountered downdrafts). My student turned early to final, and because of the existing traffic in the pattern, decided to go for 09 (another sod runway, 800' long). Approximately 10' above the ground, we encountered a wind shear which transitioned to a tailwind, causing the g-spd to accelerate and propel us past our point of T/D by approximately 100'. At T/D, I had applied full brakes and retracted the flaps and full back elevator pressure for maximum effective braking, but the aircraft was unable to stop until went into the ditch at the runway end and struck the embankment. We immediately shut off all systems and exited the aircraft. My own comments: know your home airport and don't violate the rules. 1) runway 09-27 is prohibited for company airplanes. 2) runway 09-27 is supposed to be 800' long, but at the time, it measured 633' (our ground roll for the existing conditions was 685'). Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: threatened FAA penalties. Aircraft damaged limited to nose wheel, engine and propeller. Type of aircraft indicated by reporter is completely unsuitable for such a short runway. Reporter felt forced into landing on short turf runway by traffic pattern conflicts, but acknowledges he would go around if confronted by the same situation again.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA ATTEMPTS LNDG ON 800' SOD RWY--DOESN'T MAKE IT.

Narrative: AFTER FINISHING PRACTICING MANEUVERS, MY STUDENT (A CFI CANDIDATE) AND I CAME BACK EARLY TO PRACTICE LNDGS ON THE SOD RWY 05 AT KSU. AFTER SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETING 2 FULL STOP LNDGS, WE TURNED AGAIN TO DEPART 05. AFTER JOINING THE DOWNWIND FOR 05, THE AIRPLANE WAS SLOW AND LOW (ENCOUNTERED DOWNDRAFTS). MY STUDENT TURNED EARLY TO FINAL, AND BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING TFC IN THE PATTERN, DECIDED TO GO FOR 09 (ANOTHER SOD RWY, 800' LONG). APPROX 10' ABOVE THE GND, WE ENCOUNTERED A WIND SHEAR WHICH TRANSITIONED TO A TAILWIND, CAUSING THE G-SPD TO ACCELERATE AND PROPEL US PAST OUR POINT OF T/D BY APPROX 100'. AT T/D, I HAD APPLIED FULL BRAKES AND RETRACTED THE FLAPS AND FULL BACK ELEVATOR PRESSURE FOR MAX EFFECTIVE BRAKING, BUT THE ACFT WAS UNABLE TO STOP UNTIL WENT INTO THE DITCH AT THE RWY END AND STRUCK THE EMBANKMENT. WE IMMEDIATELY SHUT OFF ALL SYSTEMS AND EXITED THE ACFT. MY OWN COMMENTS: KNOW YOUR HOME ARPT AND DON'T VIOLATE THE RULES. 1) RWY 09-27 IS PROHIBITED FOR COMPANY AIRPLANES. 2) RWY 09-27 IS SUPPOSED TO BE 800' LONG, BUT AT THE TIME, IT MEASURED 633' (OUR GND ROLL FOR THE EXISTING CONDITIONS WAS 685'). CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: THREATENED FAA PENALTIES. ACFT DAMAGED LIMITED TO NOSE WHEEL, ENG AND PROP. TYPE OF ACFT INDICATED BY RPTR IS COMPLETELY UNSUITABLE FOR SUCH A SHORT RWY. RPTR FELT FORCED INTO LNDG ON SHORT TURF RWY BY TFC PATTERN CONFLICTS, BUT ACKNOWLEDGES HE WOULD GO AROUND IF CONFRONTED BY THE SAME SITUATION AGAIN.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.