Narrative:

Prior to departing we had acceptable time to plan and execute our preflight planning; evaluation and clearances. The planning included information on meteorological conditions at the time of arrival being marginal VFR; runway notams with a ficon (field condition) of 5/5/5; and the ILS approach would be our planned approach with runway analysis done to calculate the landing distance if wet and dry. Enroute there was no occurrences other than light chop. In the descent the pm received the weather and we determined we would do the ILS 24R to a full stop because the winds were straight down the runway with limited marginal cloud coverage. Around 4;000 ft ATC advises us that the winds have shifted and we will be circling north for the landing. We received the weather and there was a significant change to 340 at 10 kts with gusts. We concluded we would try the circling approach. We received very close vectors essentially directly onto the FAF 600 ft high; this is where we first encountered icing. At a safe airspeed; I the PF; descended until the airport became visible at 1800 ft MSL. Both the pm and I; PF; concluded we could circle by flying north of the airport and agreed if PF lost sight of the airport that PF would transfer controls to capt.; the pm.at this time we had not received any runway braking or status reports from the tower. We circled north and concluded we were too low and too close to the downtown area around the airport due to the northern winds and the snow and upon reaching our base to final turn concluded that we would be unable to maneuver onto the final approach path safely and we executed a missed approach. Tower gave us a heading of 360 up to 3000 ft MSL and transferred control to approach. Approach asked us our intentions and we requested the straight-in ILS to 24R due to the winds being a crosswind at both runways and the inability to safely circle to the non-approach equipped runway. Anticipating that we would once again receive vectors to the FAF rather closely and I was slowed to approach speed with 30 degrees flaps in prior to the FAF. The approach was accomplished with the autopilot to minimums; although the airport was in sight at 1700-1800 ft MSL.during the approach tower cleared us to land on runway 24R and gave sporadic wind check warnings throughout the descent; none of which included raining; icing reports; runway analysis or braking action. The autopilot was flown to minimums of 200 ft AGL. At that time I turned off the autopilot and yaw damp and started my final segment of the approach. Above the threshold the winds died down and I landed the aircraft on the centerline and in the touchdown zone. PF began applying breaks gradually then forcefully when PF noticed it wasn't sufficient enough and capt.; pm; assisted. The anti-skid attempted to kick on but the aircraft simply wasn't slowing down due to no traction from the layer of ice between the wheels and runway. Around the 1500 ft markers captain; pm and I; PF; tried our best to stop the aircraft with what was left and began swerving moderately and slid into the emas. The aircraft rolled to a stop and settled. Captain took control and I began exiting the aircraft with the passengers.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Beech 400 flight crew reported that a lack of runway condition reports from ATC contributed to an excursion from an icy runway into the EMAS overrun.

Narrative: Prior to departing we had acceptable time to plan and execute our preflight planning; evaluation and clearances. The planning included information on meteorological conditions at the time of arrival being marginal VFR; runway NOTAMs with a FICON (Field Condition) of 5/5/5; and the ILS approach would be our planned approach with runway analysis done to calculate the landing distance if wet and dry. Enroute there was no occurrences other than light chop. In the descent the PM received the weather and we determined we would do the ILS 24R to a full stop because the winds were straight down the runway with limited marginal cloud coverage. Around 4;000 ft ATC advises us that the winds have shifted and we will be circling north for the landing. We received the weather and there was a significant change to 340 at 10 kts with gusts. We concluded we would try the circling approach. We received very close vectors essentially directly onto the FAF 600 ft high; this is where we first encountered icing. At a safe airspeed; I the PF; descended until the airport became visible at 1800 ft MSL. Both the PM and I; PF; concluded we could circle by flying north of the airport and agreed if PF lost sight of the airport that PF would transfer controls to Capt.; the PM.At this time we had not received any runway braking or status reports from the Tower. We circled north and concluded we were too low and too close to the downtown area around the airport due to the northern winds and the snow and upon reaching our base to final turn concluded that we would be unable to maneuver onto the Final Approach Path safely and we executed a missed approach. Tower gave us a heading of 360 up to 3000 ft MSL and transferred control to Approach. Approach asked us our intentions and we requested the straight-in ILS to 24R due to the winds being a crosswind at both runways and the inability to safely circle to the non-approach equipped runway. Anticipating that we would once again receive vectors to the FAF rather closely and I was slowed to approach speed with 30 degrees flaps in prior to the FAF. The approach was accomplished with the autopilot to minimums; although the airport was in sight at 1700-1800 ft MSL.During the approach Tower cleared us to land on runway 24R and gave sporadic wind check warnings throughout the descent; none of which included raining; icing reports; runway analysis or braking action. The autopilot was flown to minimums of 200 ft AGL. At that time I turned off the autopilot and yaw damp and started my final segment of the approach. Above the threshold the winds died down and I landed the aircraft on the centerline and in the touchdown zone. PF began applying breaks gradually then forcefully when PF noticed it wasn't sufficient enough and Capt.; PM; assisted. The anti-skid attempted to kick on but the aircraft simply wasn't slowing down due to no traction from the layer of ice between the wheels and runway. Around the 1500 ft markers Captain; PM and I; PF; tried our best to stop the aircraft with what was left and began swerving moderately and slid into the EMAS. The aircraft rolled to a stop and settled. Captain took control and I began exiting the aircraft with the passengers.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.