Narrative:

On the cougar arrival to iah we were given a vector to intercept the runway 14L localizer. Approximately 15 NM out we reported the airport in sight. The controller seemed surprised and inquired if we in fact had the airport. Both the captain and I confirmed the airport was in sight. The controller said the reported WX was 200 ft broken, 1-2 mi visibility with fog. We both reconfirmed the airport in sight. The controller then cleared us for a visual to runway 14L, the captain then told the controller in light of the WX report that we would like to continue for the ILS. The controller reissued clearance to intercept the runway 14L localizer for the ILS approach. As we entered the localizer we entered a rain shower. However, we never lost sight of the runway. At approximately the OM we were instructed to contact the tower. Before establishing contact the captain said to ask for runway 8. I noticed and pointed out to the captain a scud deck (low clouds) below us and asked if he still wanted runway 8. He said yes. Upon contacting the tower I asked for runway 8. The controller seemed somewhat surprised but cleared us for runway 8. As we turned to land on runway 8 I again pointed out the scud deck but got no response from the captain. On short final we passed through a thin layer of clouds. The runway was always in sight and the landing uneventful. The initial decision to continue the ILS to runway 14L was proper. However, the decision to land on runway 8 was questionable if not illegal since we passed through clouds on a visual approach. Factors involved: late night arrival and the desire to shorten the distance to the gate. Landing runway 8 would save several mins in taxi time to the gate. Captain's decision to land on runway 8 not acknowledging other crew member input. First officer not being assertive enough in showing concern over the scud deck and possible problems with visual approach.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT ASKS FOR AND GETS VISUAL CIRCLING APCH WITH RPTED WX 200 BROKEN, 1-2 MI VISIBILITY.

Narrative: ON THE COUGAR ARR TO IAH WE WERE GIVEN A VECTOR TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 14L LOC. APPROX 15 NM OUT WE RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT. THE CTLR SEEMED SURPRISED AND INQUIRED IF WE IN FACT HAD THE ARPT. BOTH THE CAPT AND I CONFIRMED THE ARPT WAS IN SIGHT. THE CTLR SAID THE RPTED WX WAS 200 FT BROKEN, 1-2 MI VISIBILITY WITH FOG. WE BOTH RECONFIRMED THE ARPT IN SIGHT. THE CTLR THEN CLRED US FOR A VISUAL TO RWY 14L, THE CAPT THEN TOLD THE CTLR IN LIGHT OF THE WX RPT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE FOR THE ILS. THE CTLR REISSUED CLRNC TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 14L LOC FOR THE ILS APCH. AS WE ENTERED THE LOC WE ENTERED A RAIN SHOWER. HOWEVER, WE NEVER LOST SIGHT OF THE RWY. AT APPROX THE OM WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT THE TWR. BEFORE ESTABLISHING CONTACT THE CAPT SAID TO ASK FOR RWY 8. I NOTICED AND POINTED OUT TO THE CAPT A SCUD DECK (LOW CLOUDS) BELOW US AND ASKED IF HE STILL WANTED RWY 8. HE SAID YES. UPON CONTACTING THE TWR I ASKED FOR RWY 8. THE CTLR SEEMED SOMEWHAT SURPRISED BUT CLRED US FOR RWY 8. AS WE TURNED TO LAND ON RWY 8 I AGAIN POINTED OUT THE SCUD DECK BUT GOT NO RESPONSE FROM THE CAPT. ON SHORT FINAL WE PASSED THROUGH A THIN LAYER OF CLOUDS. THE RWY WAS ALWAYS IN SIGHT AND THE LNDG UNEVENTFUL. THE INITIAL DECISION TO CONTINUE THE ILS TO RWY 14L WAS PROPER. HOWEVER, THE DECISION TO LAND ON RWY 8 WAS QUESTIONABLE IF NOT ILLEGAL SINCE WE PASSED THROUGH CLOUDS ON A VISUAL APCH. FACTORS INVOLVED: LATE NIGHT ARR AND THE DESIRE TO SHORTEN THE DISTANCE TO THE GATE. LNDG RWY 8 WOULD SAVE SEVERAL MINS IN TAXI TIME TO THE GATE. CAPT'S DECISION TO LAND ON RWY 8 NOT ACKNOWLEDGING OTHER CREW MEMBER INPUT. FO NOT BEING ASSERTIVE ENOUGH IN SHOWING CONCERN OVER THE SCUD DECK AND POSSIBLE PROBS WITH VISUAL APCH.

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.