Narrative:

Taking friends to pick up another airplane. Called FSS millville before takeoff. NOTAM given said first half of runway 6 unusable. Knowing that prevailing winds were out of the southwest, I knew I'd be landing on runway 24, figured I'd be using first half of runway. 10 mi short of tom's river, I called the unicom on 122.7. Through the extremely busy frequency I learned that the first half of 24 was unusable. I descended and flew the downwind and base and decided I'd like a better look before landing. I flew through the base to an upwind to survey the situation. My 2 passenger (both pilots) and I looked at the runway and decided that if I landed on the white lines painted in the middle of the runway that I would be clear of the trucks and equipment on the 1ST half of the runway. I continued crosswind , downwind again, base and final, aiming for the white lines. The runway was about half covered with patchy snow. As I was beginning to flare a voice came over the radio 'barricades ahead! Barricades ahead!' before the transmission had finished I had busted through some barricades. I never saw them. Neither did my passenger. At that point I was concentrating on keeping the airplane under control. One of my passenger noted we were leaking fuel from the left wing. As soon as my wheels touched the ground I turned off my engine at the magnetos to prevent fire and coasted off the runway onto a taxiway. (Reported to NTSB and FAA.) in my opinion, barricades do not below on the approach side of a landing zone. If runway 6 had been in use, the barricades would have served a purpose. To go through them that direction meant hitting something bigger and harder. Trucks! The airport claims the barricades are required by FAA regulations. I seriously doubt that I had 3 degrees clear to the landing zone. Several other pilots at this FBO were also complaining about how hard the barricades were to see. I was the 2ND pilot in 2 weeks to do this. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter said the aircraft was a cherokee 180. The barricades were within about 20 ft of the displayed threshold and were painted white which made them impossible to see against the patchy snow on the runway. She described the damage to her aircraft which was extensive. The runway was partially closed for installation of runway lights and she thinks the work has been completed by now. The airport manager was defensive and insisted the barricades were legal.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT LNDG ON A PARTIALLY CLOSED RWY STRIKES THE BARRICADES SHORT OF THE DISPLACED THRESHOLD.

Narrative: TAKING FRIENDS TO PICK UP ANOTHER AIRPLANE. CALLED FSS MILLVILLE BEFORE TKOF. NOTAM GIVEN SAID FIRST HALF OF RWY 6 UNUSABLE. KNOWING THAT PREVAILING WINDS WERE OUT OF THE SW, I KNEW I'D BE LNDG ON RWY 24, FIGURED I'D BE USING FIRST HALF OF RWY. 10 MI SHORT OF TOM'S RIVER, I CALLED THE UNICOM ON 122.7. THROUGH THE EXTREMELY BUSY FREQ I LEARNED THAT THE FIRST HALF OF 24 WAS UNUSABLE. I DSNDED AND FLEW THE DOWNWIND AND BASE AND DECIDED I'D LIKE A BETTER LOOK BEFORE LNDG. I FLEW THROUGH THE BASE TO AN UPWIND TO SURVEY THE SIT. MY 2 PAX (BOTH PLTS) AND I LOOKED AT THE RWY AND DECIDED THAT IF I LANDED ON THE WHITE LINES PAINTED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RWY THAT I WOULD BE CLR OF THE TRUCKS AND EQUIP ON THE 1ST HALF OF THE RWY. I CONTINUED XWIND , DOWNWIND AGAIN, BASE AND FINAL, AIMING FOR THE WHITE LINES. THE RWY WAS ABOUT HALF COVERED WITH PATCHY SNOW. AS I WAS BEGINNING TO FLARE A VOICE CAME OVER THE RADIO 'BARRICADES AHEAD! BARRICADES AHEAD!' BEFORE THE XMISSION HAD FINISHED I HAD BUSTED THROUGH SOME BARRICADES. I NEVER SAW THEM. NEITHER DID MY PAX. AT THAT POINT I WAS CONCENTRATING ON KEEPING THE AIRPLANE UNDER CTL. ONE OF MY PAX NOTED WE WERE LEAKING FUEL FROM THE L WING. AS SOON AS MY WHEELS TOUCHED THE GND I TURNED OFF MY ENG AT THE MAGNETOS TO PREVENT FIRE AND COASTED OFF THE RWY ONTO A TXWY. (REPORTED TO NTSB AND FAA.) IN MY OPINION, BARRICADES DO NOT BELOW ON THE APCH SIDE OF A LNDG ZONE. IF RWY 6 HAD BEEN IN USE, THE BARRICADES WOULD HAVE SERVED A PURPOSE. TO GO THROUGH THEM THAT DIRECTION MEANT HITTING SOMETHING BIGGER AND HARDER. TRUCKS! THE ARPT CLAIMS THE BARRICADES ARE REQUIRED BY FAA REGS. I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT I HAD 3 DEGS CLR TO THE LNDG ZONE. SEVERAL OTHER PLTS AT THIS FBO WERE ALSO COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW HARD THE BARRICADES WERE TO SEE. I WAS THE 2ND PLT IN 2 WEEKS TO DO THIS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SAID THE ACFT WAS A CHEROKEE 180. THE BARRICADES WERE WITHIN ABOUT 20 FT OF THE DISPLAYED THRESHOLD AND WERE PAINTED WHITE WHICH MADE THEM IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE AGAINST THE PATCHY SNOW ON THE RWY. SHE DESCRIBED THE DAMAGE TO HER ACFT WHICH WAS EXTENSIVE. THE RWY WAS PARTIALLY CLOSED FOR INSTALLATION OF RWY LIGHTS AND SHE THINKS THE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY NOW. THE ARPT MGR WAS DEFENSIVE AND INSISTED THE BARRICADES WERE LEGAL.

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.