Reporter complains of FAA personnel on active runway not in communication through unicom and in unma...

Attributes
ACN	134743
Time
Date	199001
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : lot
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 800 msl bound upper : 1500
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : private
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 400 flight time type : 250
ASRS Report	134743
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	observation : air carrier inspector other personnel
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Air Traffic Incident	other
Situations
Airport	other physical facility

Narrative:

While landing on runway 9/27, a car driven by 3 FAA inspectors did drive onto the active runway for the full length. The car had no flags, flashing lights, and did not make any attempt to warn air traffic of their planned route down runway. The unicom frequency 122.8 was being used by other aircraft. 1 FBO (a flight school) did broadcast a warning to their students that were up at the time. This total disregard for the safety of both student and private pilots in flight is bad, to say the least. The 9/27 runway has just been rebuilt (or so they say). They left a 5' ditch on both sides of runway. As of this date, 2 planes have gone into this ditch. One was totaled by insurance company. The second had minor wing damage. If this is an approved airport, I'd hate to think of what you would approve on major fields like ord, jfk or lax. Needless to say, the FAA is going backward. When I did finally get the plane down, I went to the 3 men (or boys) in the car and they just said they were with the FAA and could do what they wanted!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: REPORTER COMPLAINS OF FAA PERSONNEL ON ACTIVE RWY NOT IN COM THROUGH UNICOM AND IN UNMARKED VEHICLE. SECONDARY COMPLAINT THAT RWY 09-27 HAS 5' DEEP DITCH ON BOTH SIDES AND IS UNSAFE.

Narrative: WHILE LNDG ON RWY 9/27, A CAR DRIVEN BY 3 FAA INSPECTORS DID DRIVE ONTO THE ACTIVE RWY FOR THE FULL LENGTH. THE CAR HAD NO FLAGS, FLASHING LIGHTS, AND DID NOT MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO WARN AIR TFC OF THEIR PLANNED ROUTE DOWN RWY. THE UNICOM FREQ 122.8 WAS BEING USED BY OTHER ACFT. 1 FBO (A FLT SCHOOL) DID BROADCAST A WARNING TO THEIR STUDENTS THAT WERE UP AT THE TIME. THIS TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE SAFETY OF BOTH STUDENT AND PVT PLTS IN FLT IS BAD, TO SAY THE LEAST. THE 9/27 RWY HAS JUST BEEN REBUILT (OR SO THEY SAY). THEY LEFT A 5' DITCH ON BOTH SIDES OF RWY. AS OF THIS DATE, 2 PLANES HAVE GONE INTO THIS DITCH. ONE WAS TOTALED BY INSURANCE COMPANY. THE SECOND HAD MINOR WING DAMAGE. IF THIS IS AN APPROVED ARPT, I'D HATE TO THINK OF WHAT YOU WOULD APPROVE ON MAJOR FIELDS LIKE ORD, JFK OR LAX. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE FAA IS GOING BACKWARD. WHEN I DID FINALLY GET THE PLANE DOWN, I WENT TO THE 3 MEN (OR BOYS) IN THE CAR AND THEY JUST SAID THEY WERE WITH THE FAA AND COULD DO WHAT THEY WANTED!

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

Reporter complains of FAA personnel on active runway not in communication through unicom and in unmarked vehicle. Secondary complaint that runway 09-27 has 5' deep ditch on both sides and is unsafe.