Narrative:

On landing in iah (on our return) a normal landing was made. Thrust reverser was used within parameters. There was no tail strike or any evidence of prior tail strike on preflight. Both captain and myself preflted the aircraft and noted no abnormalities with the tail cone. At about 80 KTS, or soon and about that time I stowed the thrust reversers. The captain took the aircraft and I noticed the tail cone missing light was illuminated on the annunciator panel. We were headed for and nearly on the high speed exit nh I believe when I called the tower and advised them that we may have lost our tail cone on the runway. We advised them to check the runway for the tail cone on tower frequency. Tower continued to land aircraft from other acrs behind us. We changed to ground prior to other air carrier arrival and explained to them we were not certain of our loss but we suspected our tail cone was on the runway. We could not see the runway at this time. Other air carrier landed and confirmed our tail cone was on the runway. Other air carrier fortunately missed the tail cone. Arrs, I feel, should not have been allowed to continue until the runway was checked for contamination. There was no prior warning of the tail cones impending separation. Supplemental information from acn 199459: we advised iah tower that there was possibly a tail cone on the runway, since we were aware of an aircraft on approach behind us. The tower merely advised the aircraft of a possible tail cone on the runway. He did not instruct the aircraft to go around. Rear stairs were down at previous stop (bos), giving numerous ramp personnel access to tail cone area. Post-flight inspection showed rim on fuselage where tail cone attaches was torn away.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG LOSES TAIL CONE ON RWY DURING LNDG ROLLOUT AND ADVISES TWR OF SITUATION. TWR ALLOWS SUCCEEDING ACFT TO LAND ON SAME RWY WITH TAIL CONE STILL ON RWY. THIS WAS A NIGHT OP.

Narrative: ON LNDG IN IAH (ON OUR RETURN) A NORMAL LNDG WAS MADE. THRUST REVERSER WAS USED WITHIN PARAMETERS. THERE WAS NO TAIL STRIKE OR ANY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR TAIL STRIKE ON PREFLT. BOTH CAPT AND MYSELF PREFLTED THE ACFT AND NOTED NO ABNORMALITIES WITH THE TAIL CONE. AT ABOUT 80 KTS, OR SOON AND ABOUT THAT TIME I STOWED THE THRUST REVERSERS. THE CAPT TOOK THE ACFT AND I NOTICED THE TAIL CONE MISSING LIGHT WAS ILLUMINATED ON THE ANNUNCIATOR PANEL. WE WERE HEADED FOR AND NEARLY ON THE HIGH SPD EXIT NH I BELIEVE WHEN I CALLED THE TWR AND ADVISED THEM THAT WE MAY HAVE LOST OUR TAIL CONE ON THE RWY. WE ADVISED THEM TO CHK THE RWY FOR THE TAIL CONE ON TWR FREQ. TWR CONTINUED TO LAND ACFT FROM OTHER ACRS BEHIND US. WE CHANGED TO GND PRIOR TO OTHER ACR ARR AND EXPLAINED TO THEM WE WERE NOT CERTAIN OF OUR LOSS BUT WE SUSPECTED OUR TAIL CONE WAS ON THE RWY. WE COULD NOT SEE THE RWY AT THIS TIME. OTHER ACR LANDED AND CONFIRMED OUR TAIL CONE WAS ON THE RWY. OTHER ACR FORTUNATELY MISSED THE TAIL CONE. ARRS, I FEEL, SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO CONTINUE UNTIL THE RWY WAS CHKED FOR CONTAMINATION. THERE WAS NO PRIOR WARNING OF THE TAIL CONES IMPENDING SEPARATION. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 199459: WE ADVISED IAH TWR THAT THERE WAS POSSIBLY A TAIL CONE ON THE RWY, SINCE WE WERE AWARE OF AN ACFT ON APCH BEHIND US. THE TWR MERELY ADVISED THE ACFT OF A POSSIBLE TAIL CONE ON THE RWY. HE DID NOT INSTRUCT THE ACFT TO GAR. REAR STAIRS WERE DOWN AT PREVIOUS STOP (BOS), GIVING NUMEROUS RAMP PERSONNEL ACCESS TO TAIL CONE AREA. POST-FLT INSPECTION SHOWED RIM ON FUSELAGE WHERE TAIL CONE ATTACHES WAS TORN AWAY.

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.