Narrative:

I landed approximately 100' short of a 'displaced threshold' (on part of a temporarily closed portion of runway 25 at toledo). There were no runway markings, only construction cones aligned on the sides of the runway. Construction was being performed along the side of the first 500' of the runway. Human performance: I had skimmed through the NOTAMS on the preflight briefing, noting numerous items about construction, closed txwys, etc, and intended to get into the details while en route but being the first leg of a four day trip, I spent more time familiarizing myself with my new copilot and his experience, as well as the state of our airline and shortly we were arriving at toledo. The copilot copied the ATIS, using his own shorthand and held it out for me to review. We discussed it in detail, but I focused on he numerous taxiway closures at the far end of the runway and assumed that the 'runway 25-500' notation was associated with that end. As we were going over the information, it became apparent that we were being held at 11000' for traffic even as we were approaching the airport. I became more concerned with 'getting down' and when we were finally cleared for the visibility approach, put all my attention into that effort. I 'forgot' about the construction until short final, when I noticed the yellow cones on the sides, but concentrating on my T/D, it didn't jog anything. As I flared, the copilot said 'the first 500' is closed' which was the first it occurred to me that that was the meaning of the cones. I think I said 'what?' and pulled back on the nose. We touched down beyond the extent of the parallel yellow cones but short of the orange cones on each side. Yes, I should have spent more time with the NOTAMS on the preflight brief. However, occasionally there are so many, and many of them are not pertinent, or not in effect at time of arrival, that there is a tendency to skim them and focus on the ATIS briefing for the 'meaningful' NOTAMS. With all the information presented in the ATIS briefing, I should have queried my copilot in depth as to the meaning of all his notations, but we got rushed on the approach, and with fuel considerations, passenger comfort, etc (smoothness, T/D to expedite taxi to the ramp, etc) my attention went elsewhere. The runway closure markings (cones) were not sufficiently apparent to independently, alert us to the closure. After the incident, the copilot and I went to the tower cabin attendant to discuss the situation. The construction foreman was already up there, and he admitted that, because of the temporary nature of the closure, the airport was 'trying to save a few bucks,' as well as not mark up the runway with paint which would be hard to remove later. The local controller said he flies privately, and had he not known about the closure, would not have been able to ascertain the meaning of the cones off the sides of the runway (during a flight the previous week). As we talked, an small aircraft landed on the closed portion. Afterwards, as aircraft were cleared to land, the local controller was adding the closure information to the clearance. Supplemental information from acn 174923. I picked up the ATIS. There was reports that runway 25 had the first 500' of the runway closed during briefing all aspects of closed txwys and navaids were briefed. Equipment working on the north side, the captain was flying at about 100'. It appeared the captain would land on the closed portion. I made 3 calls that 500' of runway 25 was closed. We touched down about 100' short of the cones marking the threshold.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LANDS ON CLOSED PORTION OF RWY.

Narrative: I LANDED APPROX 100' SHORT OF A 'DISPLACED THRESHOLD' (ON PART OF A TEMPORARILY CLOSED PORTION OF RWY 25 AT TOLEDO). THERE WERE NO RWY MARKINGS, ONLY CONSTRUCTION CONES ALIGNED ON THE SIDES OF THE RWY. CONSTRUCTION WAS BEING PERFORMED ALONG THE SIDE OF THE FIRST 500' OF THE RWY. HUMAN PERFORMANCE: I HAD SKIMMED THROUGH THE NOTAMS ON THE PREFLT BRIEFING, NOTING NUMEROUS ITEMS ABOUT CONSTRUCTION, CLOSED TXWYS, ETC, AND INTENDED TO GET INTO THE DETAILS WHILE ENRTE BUT BEING THE FIRST LEG OF A FOUR DAY TRIP, I SPENT MORE TIME FAMILIARIZING MYSELF WITH MY NEW COPLT AND HIS EXPERIENCE, AS WELL AS THE STATE OF OUR AIRLINE AND SHORTLY WE WERE ARRIVING AT TOLEDO. THE COPLT COPIED THE ATIS, USING HIS OWN SHORTHAND AND HELD IT OUT FOR ME TO REVIEW. WE DISCUSSED IT IN DETAIL, BUT I FOCUSED ON HE NUMEROUS TXWY CLOSURES AT THE FAR END OF THE RWY AND ASSUMED THAT THE 'RWY 25-500' NOTATION WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT END. AS WE WERE GOING OVER THE INFO, IT BECAME APPARENT THAT WE WERE BEING HELD AT 11000' FOR TFC EVEN AS WE WERE APCHING THE ARPT. I BECAME MORE CONCERNED WITH 'GETTING DOWN' AND WHEN WE WERE FINALLY CLRED FOR THE VIS APCH, PUT ALL MY ATTN INTO THAT EFFORT. I 'FORGOT' ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION UNTIL SHORT FINAL, WHEN I NOTICED THE YELLOW CONES ON THE SIDES, BUT CONCENTRATING ON MY T/D, IT DIDN'T JOG ANYTHING. AS I FLARED, THE COPLT SAID 'THE FIRST 500' IS CLOSED' WHICH WAS THE FIRST IT OCCURRED TO ME THAT THAT WAS THE MEANING OF THE CONES. I THINK I SAID 'WHAT?' AND PULLED BACK ON THE NOSE. WE TOUCHED DOWN BEYOND THE EXTENT OF THE PARALLEL YELLOW CONES BUT SHORT OF THE ORANGE CONES ON EACH SIDE. YES, I SHOULD HAVE SPENT MORE TIME WITH THE NOTAMS ON THE PREFLT BRIEF. HOWEVER, OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE SO MANY, AND MANY OF THEM ARE NOT PERTINENT, OR NOT IN EFFECT AT TIME OF ARR, THAT THERE IS A TENDENCY TO SKIM THEM AND FOCUS ON THE ATIS BRIEFING FOR THE 'MEANINGFUL' NOTAMS. WITH ALL THE INFO PRESENTED IN THE ATIS BRIEFING, I SHOULD HAVE QUERIED MY COPLT IN DEPTH AS TO THE MEANING OF ALL HIS NOTATIONS, BUT WE GOT RUSHED ON THE APCH, AND WITH FUEL CONSIDERATIONS, PAX COMFORT, ETC (SMOOTHNESS, T/D TO EXPEDITE TAXI TO THE RAMP, ETC) MY ATTN WENT ELSEWHERE. THE RWY CLOSURE MARKINGS (CONES) WERE NOT SUFFICIENTLY APPARENT TO INDEPENDENTLY, ALERT US TO THE CLOSURE. AFTER THE INCIDENT, THE COPLT AND I WENT TO THE TWR CAB TO DISCUSS THE SITUATION. THE CONSTRUCTION FOREMAN WAS ALREADY UP THERE, AND HE ADMITTED THAT, BECAUSE OF THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE CLOSURE, THE ARPT WAS 'TRYING TO SAVE A FEW BUCKS,' AS WELL AS NOT MARK UP THE RWY WITH PAINT WHICH WOULD BE HARD TO REMOVE LATER. THE LCL CTLR SAID HE FLIES PRIVATELY, AND HAD HE NOT KNOWN ABOUT THE CLOSURE, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THE MEANING OF THE CONES OFF THE SIDES OF THE RWY (DURING A FLT THE PREVIOUS WK). AS WE TALKED, AN SMA LANDED ON THE CLOSED PORTION. AFTERWARDS, AS ACFT WERE CLRED TO LAND, THE LCL CTLR WAS ADDING THE CLOSURE INFO TO THE CLRNC. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 174923. I PICKED UP THE ATIS. THERE WAS RPTS THAT RWY 25 HAD THE FIRST 500' OF THE RWY CLOSED DURING BRIEFING ALL ASPECTS OF CLOSED TXWYS AND NAVAIDS WERE BRIEFED. EQUIP WORKING ON THE N SIDE, THE CAPT WAS FLYING AT ABOUT 100'. IT APPEARED THE CAPT WOULD LAND ON THE CLOSED PORTION. I MADE 3 CALLS THAT 500' OF RWY 25 WAS CLOSED. WE TOUCHED DOWN ABOUT 100' SHORT OF THE CONES MARKING THE THRESHOLD.

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.