Narrative:

Our flight was cleared for a visual approach from north of airport to runway 15R. Approach to runway was normal. Runway is only 5186 ft in length. Due to short runway, approach was normally adjusted to land within first 1000 ft. Approach-landing-rollout and taxi to parking was normal. The first indication that I had there had been any problem about the day was when I received a call from the isp general manager. He said that the tower had called him and said that a resident had complained that we had flown too close to his trees during our approach. The general manager said he asked the tower controller what he thought about the approach. The general manager told me that the tower controller had said that he watched the approach and thought it looked completely normal. The general manager also told me that the city was talking about making the runways longer -- that many residents were upset about the issue and that complaints had been up lately. He stated that he didn't think anything else would come from the complaint. About 1 hour later I received a call at my hotel from the FAA. The inspector told me that their was a complaint that I had topped someone's trees on my approach. He also stated that there was some heated public debate taking place over the runways being made longer and that complaints recently increased. He then stated that even though that was the case, that it was his job to investigate the complaint. I told the inspector that my approach had been normal for the short runway. That the approach had been made to touchdown in the first 100 ft of the runway, and that I estimated that the touchdown occurred 800-1000 ft down the runway, and that I thought the approach had been normal. The inspector stated that someone would have to inspect the aircraft downline since it had departed several hours ago, and that depending on what was found that I may or may not receive a letter of investigation. The next morning the isp general manager informed me that he had talked to our maintenance people, that they had inspected the aircraft and no evidence of damage was found. I also checked the computer maintenance logs and damage logs. No entries were made in reference to this event. It appears to me that an irate resident living next to the isp airport is extra-sensitive to the debate over making the runways longer, and looking for anything that they can to keep the debate alive.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT BROUGHT TO HIS KNEES BY A GROVE OF TREES. ACR FLC RECEIVES COMPLAINT FROM 'CITIZEN' THAT FLT 'TOPPED' HIS TREES WHILE ON SHORT FINAL FOR RWY 15R AT ISP.

Narrative: OUR FLT WAS CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH FROM N OF ARPT TO RWY 15R. APCH TO RWY WAS NORMAL. RWY IS ONLY 5186 FT IN LENGTH. DUE TO SHORT RWY, APCH WAS NORMALLY ADJUSTED TO LAND WITHIN FIRST 1000 FT. APCH-LNDG-ROLLOUT AND TAXI TO PARKING WAS NORMAL. THE FIRST INDICATION THAT I HAD THERE HAD BEEN ANY PROBLEM ABOUT THE DAY WAS WHEN I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE ISP GENERAL MGR. HE SAID THAT THE TWR HAD CALLED HIM AND SAID THAT A RESIDENT HAD COMPLAINED THAT WE HAD FLOWN TOO CLOSE TO HIS TREES DURING OUR APCH. THE GENERAL MGR SAID HE ASKED THE TWR CTLR WHAT HE THOUGHT ABOUT THE APCH. THE GENERAL MGR TOLD ME THAT THE TWR CTLR HAD SAID THAT HE WATCHED THE APCH AND THOUGHT IT LOOKED COMPLETELY NORMAL. THE GENERAL MGR ALSO TOLD ME THAT THE CITY WAS TALKING ABOUT MAKING THE RWYS LONGER -- THAT MANY RESIDENTS WERE UPSET ABOUT THE ISSUE AND THAT COMPLAINTS HAD BEEN UP LATELY. HE STATED THAT HE DIDN'T THINK ANYTHING ELSE WOULD COME FROM THE COMPLAINT. ABOUT 1 HR LATER I RECEIVED A CALL AT MY HOTEL FROM THE FAA. THE INSPECTOR TOLD ME THAT THEIR WAS A COMPLAINT THAT I HAD TOPPED SOMEONE'S TREES ON MY APCH. HE ALSO STATED THAT THERE WAS SOME HEATED PUBLIC DEBATE TAKING PLACE OVER THE RWYS BEING MADE LONGER AND THAT COMPLAINTS RECENTLY INCREASED. HE THEN STATED THAT EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS THE CASE, THAT IT WAS HIS JOB TO INVESTIGATE THE COMPLAINT. I TOLD THE INSPECTOR THAT MY APCH HAD BEEN NORMAL FOR THE SHORT RWY. THAT THE APCH HAD BEEN MADE TO TOUCHDOWN IN THE FIRST 100 FT OF THE RWY, AND THAT I ESTIMATED THAT THE TOUCHDOWN OCCURRED 800-1000 FT DOWN THE RWY, AND THAT I THOUGHT THE APCH HAD BEEN NORMAL. THE INSPECTOR STATED THAT SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO INSPECT THE ACFT DOWNLINE SINCE IT HAD DEPARTED SEVERAL HRS AGO, AND THAT DEPENDING ON WHAT WAS FOUND THAT I MAY OR MAY NOT RECEIVE A LETTER OF INVESTIGATION. THE NEXT MORNING THE ISP GENERAL MGR INFORMED ME THAT HE HAD TALKED TO OUR MAINT PEOPLE, THAT THEY HAD INSPECTED THE ACFT AND NO EVIDENCE OF DAMAGE WAS FOUND. I ALSO CHKED THE COMPUTER MAINT LOGS AND DAMAGE LOGS. NO ENTRIES WERE MADE IN REF TO THIS EVENT. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT AN IRATE RESIDENT LIVING NEXT TO THE ISP ARPT IS EXTRA-SENSITIVE TO THE DEBATE OVER MAKING THE RWYS LONGER, AND LOOKING FOR ANYTHING THAT THEY CAN TO KEEP THE DEBATE ALIVE.

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.