Narrative:

This started with an ILS to runway 4 at lex. ATIS listed visibility at 1 1/4 mile 500 ft overcast; snow; wet runway with braking reported 5/5/5. During the approach at approximately the FAF; the localizer went out of service. We broke off the approach with the controller and he vectored us around for another attempt at rwy 4. We re-vectored again with localizer appearing to work and then failing again (I wondered at this point if the localizer was being interfered with by snow accumulation or snow vehicles removing snow). The controller offered ILS rwy 22 and when we queried the winds; they were 050/5. Braking was reported as good with a wet runway. We commenced the approach and broke out at minimums to a snow covered runway. I landed without incident; but upon brake activation; the brakes were nominally effective. I kept the thrust reversers deployed at max reverse until the airplane was nearly stopped. After shutdown; I contacted the control tower and wanted to know why there was nothing reported as to snow or runway condition. The controller told me that was all based on lexington airport ops and they make the calls. How they can call a 'wet' runway and proceed to plow the runway immediately after our landing is concerning. There is a major disconnect on how this information is collected and disseminated to pilots. I was certainly not given all the information I should have received to conduct this operation with safety. If all information would have been made available; I would have elected to divert to our filed alternate.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air Carrier Captain reported poor braking on landing in LEX on a snow covered runway that had been reported as 'wet'.

Narrative: This started with an ILS to Runway 4 at LEX. ATIS listed visibility at 1 1/4 mile 500 ft overcast; snow; wet runway with braking reported 5/5/5. During the approach at approximately the FAF; the localizer went out of service. We broke off the approach with the Controller and he vectored us around for another attempt at Rwy 4. We re-vectored again with localizer appearing to work and then failing again (I wondered at this point if the localizer was being interfered with by snow accumulation or snow vehicles removing snow). The Controller offered ILS Rwy 22 and when we queried the winds; they were 050/5. Braking was reported as good with a wet runway. We commenced the approach and broke out at minimums to a snow covered runway. I landed without incident; but upon brake activation; the brakes were nominally effective. I kept the thrust reversers deployed at max reverse until the airplane was nearly stopped. After shutdown; I contacted the Control Tower and wanted to know why there was nothing reported as to snow or runway condition. The Controller told me that was all based on Lexington Airport Ops and they make the calls. How they can call a 'wet' runway and proceed to plow the runway immediately after our landing is concerning. There is a major disconnect on how this information is collected and disseminated to pilots. I was certainly not given all the information I should have received to conduct this operation with safety. If all information would have been made available; I would have elected to divert to our filed alternate.

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.