Small transport on IFR flight plan lands at airport notamed closed. No information given.

Attributes
ACN	242592
Time
Date	199305
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : rvl
State Reference	PA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : boi
Operator	other
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 3500 flight time type : 800
ASRS Report	242592
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	incursion : landing without clearance
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Ambiguous
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

The flight was into reedsville, PA (rvl). We reviewed the NOTAMS supplied by duat and found none relevant for the airport. We reported the field in sight to center and they handed us off. We contacted unicom and they told us the winds were calm and they were landing runway 24. Upon landing we found out the airport was notamed closed for a glide competition. With the information we were supplied by duat, dispatch, center, and unicom, we had no idea the airport was closed. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that FSS said no NOTAM when reporter asked. Neither center nor approach said anything about airport closure. Unicom person was the head of the competition, so no one was very worried about his arrival. He had no awareness until someone on the ground said something. That is why the report. His main problem is why not any easy and effective way to get NOTAM information to pilots? This system is so poor. Because a NOTAM is printed does it go away? No, but it is treated as though it does. Duat gives some information, FSS gives some information. On an IFR flight plan center and approach should have given him the closure information. No one did. Why not?

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT ON IFR FLT PLAN LANDS AT ARPT NOTAMED CLOSED. NO INFO GIVEN.

Narrative: THE FLT WAS INTO REEDSVILLE, PA (RVL). WE REVIEWED THE NOTAMS SUPPLIED BY DUAT AND FOUND NONE RELEVANT FOR THE ARPT. WE RPTED THE FIELD IN SIGHT TO CTR AND THEY HANDED US OFF. WE CONTACTED UNICOM AND THEY TOLD US THE WINDS WERE CALM AND THEY WERE LNDG RWY 24. UPON LNDG WE FOUND OUT THE ARPT WAS NOTAMED CLOSED FOR A GLIDE COMPETITION. WITH THE INFO WE WERE SUPPLIED BY DUAT, DISPATCH, CTR, AND UNICOM, WE HAD NO IDEA THE ARPT WAS CLOSED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT FSS SAID NO NOTAM WHEN RPTR ASKED. NEITHER CTR NOR APCH SAID ANYTHING ABOUT ARPT CLOSURE. UNICOM PERSON WAS THE HEAD OF THE COMPETITION, SO NO ONE WAS VERY WORRIED ABOUT HIS ARR. HE HAD NO AWARENESS UNTIL SOMEONE ON THE GND SAID SOMETHING. THAT IS WHY THE RPT. HIS MAIN PROB IS WHY NOT ANY EASY AND EFFECTIVE WAY TO GET NOTAM INFO TO PLTS? THIS SYS IS SO POOR. BECAUSE A NOTAM IS PRINTED DOES IT GO AWAY? NO, BUT IT IS TREATED AS THOUGH IT DOES. DUAT GIVES SOME INFO, FSS GIVES SOME INFO. ON AN IFR FLT PLAN CTR AND APCH SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM THE CLOSURE INFO. NO ONE DID. WHY NOT?

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.