Narrative:

We were returning from a government flight in a research aircraft. The WX was as stated above, bay approach had cleared us for the approach and advised, somewhere in the sequence, that they had not as yet been able to contact the nuq tower. (Nuq tower is normally closed from 2400-0600 due to manning. It is opened only for the united states navy approved takeoff/lndgs, of which our sortie was one. The tower/field being closed during that period for all other traffic.) we continued the approach, broke out and saw the field without lights. Our expectation was that the tower would come up at any time, followed by the runway lights. As we got closer at the MDA (700 ft MSL) we could see the runway clearly in the landing lights, the white surface reflecting sufficient light to show that the surface was clear of vehicles, etc. Our choices at that point were to land, circle, or make a missed approach. As we expected the tower to come up at any time, we did contemplate landing on the initial approach. When the tower failed to come up, we did not contemplate landing without overflying the runway to validate its non- contaminated surface. Had we not been VFR underneath the overcast, we clearly would have had no choice but to pull up and rejoin the approach sequence. As the runway was clear, we elected to perform a standard circling approach maneuver, left turn, to complete a visual approach to runway 32R. While on the downwind, bay approach advised us the tower was coming up, we contacted them and the subsequent approach and landing were uneventful. The local populace was not pleased. We had begun the approach configured for minimum drag (approach flaps) in order to make as little noise as possible. The subsequent low-altitude circle, coupled with landing lights reflecting off the undercast caused considerable adverse reaction on the ground from various residences. IFR approachs to airfields whose tower has been closed are common, hayward map being one local example. Non air carrier aircraft do it daily. There has been no definitive guidance to date on a situation such as this, had NASA owned the airfield vice the united states navy, we would clearly have landed. Guidance being developed by our branch suggests we will hold at altitude in future such instances, that posture is by no means universally espoused as some of us have made a circling approach to a non tower airport in NASA's possession (wallops island, va). A key question is whether or not a straight- in approach can be converted by the crew to a circling approach, absent other ATC guidance and control. It seems to me that bay approach cleared us for the approach (TACAN 32L/right) but there was no landing clearance. Absent that latter fact, it seems clear we could reasonably be expected to circle if we had any doubt about airfield/runway surface conditions, a posture defended by aim paragraph 5-56f which allows circling approachs and runway overflt where it is desirable. The entire matter is relevant only perhaps on the dearth of information concerning approachs to 'closed' airports, particularly when they are supposed to be open.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF A GOV OPERATED MLT ACFT CIRCLED TO LAND WHEN THE TWR DID NOT RESPOND TO APCH CTLR HDOF OR WERE THE RWY BOUNDARY LIGHTS ON.

Narrative: WE WERE RETURNING FROM A GOV FLT IN A RESEARCH ACFT. THE WX WAS AS STATED ABOVE, BAY APCH HAD CLRED US FOR THE APCH AND ADVISED, SOMEWHERE IN THE SEQUENCE, THAT THEY HAD NOT AS YET BEEN ABLE TO CONTACT THE NUQ TWR. (NUQ TWR IS NORMALLY CLOSED FROM 2400-0600 DUE TO MANNING. IT IS OPENED ONLY FOR THE UNITED STATES NAVY APPROVED TKOF/LNDGS, OF WHICH OUR SORTIE WAS ONE. THE TWR/FIELD BEING CLOSED DURING THAT PERIOD FOR ALL OTHER TFC.) WE CONTINUED THE APCH, BROKE OUT AND SAW THE FIELD WITHOUT LIGHTS. OUR EXPECTATION WAS THAT THE TWR WOULD COME UP AT ANY TIME, FOLLOWED BY THE RWY LIGHTS. AS WE GOT CLOSER AT THE MDA (700 FT MSL) WE COULD SEE THE RWY CLRLY IN THE LNDG LIGHTS, THE WHITE SURFACE REFLECTING SUFFICIENT LIGHT TO SHOW THAT THE SURFACE WAS CLR OF VEHICLES, ETC. OUR CHOICES AT THAT POINT WERE TO LAND, CIRCLE, OR MAKE A MISSED APCH. AS WE EXPECTED THE TWR TO COME UP AT ANY TIME, WE DID CONTEMPLATE LNDG ON THE INITIAL APCH. WHEN THE TWR FAILED TO COME UP, WE DID NOT CONTEMPLATE LNDG WITHOUT OVERFLYING THE RWY TO VALIDATE ITS NON- CONTAMINATED SURFACE. HAD WE NOT BEEN VFR UNDERNEATH THE OVCST, WE CLRLY WOULD HAVE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO PULL UP AND REJOIN THE APCH SEQUENCE. AS THE RWY WAS CLR, WE ELECTED TO PERFORM A STANDARD CIRCLING APCH MANEUVER, L TURN, TO COMPLETE A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 32R. WHILE ON THE DOWNWIND, BAY APCH ADVISED US THE TWR WAS COMING UP, WE CONTACTED THEM AND THE SUBSEQUENT APCH AND LNDG WERE UNEVENTFUL. THE LCL POPULACE WAS NOT PLEASED. WE HAD BEGUN THE APCH CONFIGURED FOR MINIMUM DRAG (APCH FLAPS) IN ORDER TO MAKE AS LITTLE NOISE AS POSSIBLE. THE SUBSEQUENT LOW-ALT CIRCLE, COUPLED WITH LNDG LIGHTS REFLECTING OFF THE UNDERCAST CAUSED CONSIDERABLE ADVERSE REACTION ON THE GND FROM VARIOUS RESIDENCES. IFR APCHS TO AIRFIELDS WHOSE TWR HAS BEEN CLOSED ARE COMMON, HAYWARD MAP BEING ONE LCL EXAMPLE. NON ACR ACFT DO IT DAILY. THERE HAS BEEN NO DEFINITIVE GUIDANCE TO DATE ON A SIT SUCH AS THIS, HAD NASA OWNED THE AIRFIELD VICE THE UNITED STATES NAVY, WE WOULD CLRLY HAVE LANDED. GUIDANCE BEING DEVELOPED BY OUR BRANCH SUGGESTS WE WILL HOLD AT ALT IN FUTURE SUCH INSTANCES, THAT POSTURE IS BY NO MEANS UNIVERSALLY ESPOUSED AS SOME OF US HAVE MADE A CIRCLING APCH TO A NON TWR ARPT IN NASA'S POSSESSION (WALLOPS ISLAND, VA). A KEY QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT A STRAIGHT- IN APCH CAN BE CONVERTED BY THE CREW TO A CIRCLING APCH, ABSENT OTHER ATC GUIDANCE AND CTL. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT BAY APCH CLRED US FOR THE APCH (TACAN 32L/R) BUT THERE WAS NO LNDG CLRNC. ABSENT THAT LATTER FACT, IT SEEMS CLR WE COULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO CIRCLE IF WE HAD ANY DOUBT ABOUT AIRFIELD/RWY SURFACE CONDITIONS, A POSTURE DEFENDED BY AIM PARAGRAPH 5-56F WHICH ALLOWS CIRCLING APCHS AND RWY OVERFLT WHERE IT IS DESIRABLE. THE ENTIRE MATTER IS RELEVANT ONLY PERHAPS ON THE DEARTH OF INFO CONCERNING APCHS TO 'CLOSED' ARPTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN.

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.