Narrative:

We were scheduled to fly on a routine commuter flight from mke-grr-mkg-mke. Because the leg between grr and mkg is only a 10 min flight, I asked the first officer/PNF while en route to grr, if he would also pickup mkg ATIS. It was then that I learned there was an airshow in progress at mkg. This concerned me greatly because I also learned the active runway was the airshow's demonstration runway. I became very concerned about the high level of activity centered near the active runway. Upon landing in grr I made 3 unsuccessful attempts to contact company personnel to get some sort of feeling about the airshow. I envisioned aircraft displays on both sides of the runway and people walking across the runway back and forth between displays, aircraft parked too close to the runway etc. I was additionally concerned that all txwys leading to the terminal ramp were closed. I had never flown into an airshow environment before and was unfamiliar with the usage of 'follow me' trucks. After conferring with my experienced first officer while still on the ramp in grr, I decided to execute a low, slow approach over the active runway in landing confign less landing flaps. The first officer would be the PF to maximize my ability to observe the situation. While still in grr I made several radio calls to prepare the controllers for our low approach without disturbing the airshow (grr clearance delivery, mkg approach control while en route, company operations in mkg and grr, and again with mkg tower). I also briefed the passenger that we may do a low approach (there were 7 passenger aboard). I did not think to use the landline to contact mkg tower at this time to get a more thorough briefing of the situation. Upon arrival into the mkg airport area I asked the tower for a complete brief of all the traffic in the area and was surprised to learn about the helicopters landing and taking off very near the threshold of runway 24. This was not wise in my opinion. The low approach was executed without incident, and most of my concerns were appropriately addressed. This low approach served as an expert tool for the situation at hand. Upon landing, some of my concerns about people walking somewhat freely were realized and taxiing became somewhat stressful. It was brought to my attention that the FAA was not pleased with the low approach, although they had no idea of my great concern for safety. This low approach was in no way reckless endangerment of unwilling passenger. We were slow (150 KIAS) and in landing confign with a very normal recovery process similar to a go around once past the activity on the ground. Despite the FAA's concerns, I feel as though I properly executed my authority/authorized and responsibility for safety as PIC. I do, however, have recommendations for avoiding such unusual workload on pilots flying scheduled acrs into airshow smaller than the oshkosh airshow. Simply print a detailed layout of the show's activity on the ground and the txwys carriers should expect to utilize to the ramp and distribute the memos via normal commercial chart revisions one month prior. This could easily be done for all airshows with scheduled air service expected and would alleviate future flcs from experiencing the same concerns I felt.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LOW APCH AND LNDG WITH PAX AT ARPT DURING THE AIRSHOW.

Narrative: WE WERE SCHEDULED TO FLY ON A ROUTINE COMMUTER FLT FROM MKE-GRR-MKG-MKE. BECAUSE THE LEG BTWN GRR AND MKG IS ONLY A 10 MIN FLT, I ASKED THE FO/PNF WHILE ENRTE TO GRR, IF HE WOULD ALSO PICKUP MKG ATIS. IT WAS THEN THAT I LEARNED THERE WAS AN AIRSHOW IN PROGRESS AT MKG. THIS CONCERNED ME GREATLY BECAUSE I ALSO LEARNED THE ACTIVE RWY WAS THE AIRSHOW'S DEMONSTRATION RWY. I BECAME VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGH LEVEL OF ACTIVITY CTRED NEAR THE ACTIVE RWY. UPON LNDG IN GRR I MADE 3 UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT COMPANY PERSONNEL TO GET SOME SORT OF FEELING ABOUT THE AIRSHOW. I ENVISIONED ACFT DISPLAYS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE RWY AND PEOPLE WALKING ACROSS THE RWY BACK AND FORTH BTWN DISPLAYS, ACFT PARKED TOO CLOSE TO THE RWY ETC. I WAS ADDITIONALLY CONCERNED THAT ALL TXWYS LEADING TO THE TERMINAL RAMP WERE CLOSED. I HAD NEVER FLOWN INTO AN AIRSHOW ENVIRONMENT BEFORE AND WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH THE USAGE OF 'FOLLOW ME' TRUCKS. AFTER CONFERRING WITH MY EXPERIENCED FO WHILE STILL ON THE RAMP IN GRR, I DECIDED TO EXECUTE A LOW, SLOW APCH OVER THE ACTIVE RWY IN LNDG CONFIGN LESS LNDG FLAPS. THE FO WOULD BE THE PF TO MAXIMIZE MY ABILITY TO OBSERVE THE SIT. WHILE STILL IN GRR I MADE SEVERAL RADIO CALLS TO PREPARE THE CTLRS FOR OUR LOW APCH WITHOUT DISTURBING THE AIRSHOW (GRR CLRNC DELIVERY, MKG APCH CTL WHILE ENRTE, COMPANY OPS IN MKG AND GRR, AND AGAIN WITH MKG TWR). I ALSO BRIEFED THE PAX THAT WE MAY DO A LOW APCH (THERE WERE 7 PAX ABOARD). I DID NOT THINK TO USE THE LANDLINE TO CONTACT MKG TWR AT THIS TIME TO GET A MORE THOROUGH BRIEFING OF THE SIT. UPON ARR INTO THE MKG ARPT AREA I ASKED THE TWR FOR A COMPLETE BRIEF OF ALL THE TFC IN THE AREA AND WAS SURPRISED TO LEARN ABOUT THE HELIS LNDG AND TAKING OFF VERY NEAR THE THRESHOLD OF RWY 24. THIS WAS NOT WISE IN MY OPINION. THE LOW APCH WAS EXECUTED WITHOUT INCIDENT, AND MOST OF MY CONCERNS WERE APPROPRIATELY ADDRESSED. THIS LOW APCH SERVED AS AN EXPERT TOOL FOR THE SIT AT HAND. UPON LNDG, SOME OF MY CONCERNS ABOUT PEOPLE WALKING SOMEWHAT FREELY WERE REALIZED AND TAXIING BECAME SOMEWHAT STRESSFUL. IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTN THAT THE FAA WAS NOT PLEASED WITH THE LOW APCH, ALTHOUGH THEY HAD NO IDEA OF MY GREAT CONCERN FOR SAFETY. THIS LOW APCH WAS IN NO WAY RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT OF UNWILLING PAX. WE WERE SLOW (150 KIAS) AND IN LNDG CONFIGN WITH A VERY NORMAL RECOVERY PROCESS SIMILAR TO A GAR ONCE PAST THE ACTIVITY ON THE GND. DESPITE THE FAA'S CONCERNS, I FEEL AS THOUGH I PROPERLY EXECUTED MY AUTH AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR SAFETY AS PIC. I DO, HOWEVER, HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING SUCH UNUSUAL WORKLOAD ON PLTS FLYING SCHEDULED ACRS INTO AIRSHOW SMALLER THAN THE OSHKOSH AIRSHOW. SIMPLY PRINT A DETAILED LAYOUT OF THE SHOW'S ACTIVITY ON THE GND AND THE TXWYS CARRIERS SHOULD EXPECT TO UTILIZE TO THE RAMP AND DISTRIBUTE THE MEMOS VIA NORMAL COMMERCIAL CHART REVISIONS ONE MONTH PRIOR. THIS COULD EASILY BE DONE FOR ALL AIRSHOWS WITH SCHEDULED AIR SVC EXPECTED AND WOULD ALLEVIATE FUTURE FLCS FROM EXPERIENCING THE SAME CONCERNS I FELT.

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.