Narrative:

Scheduled to fly from syr to ewr. In syr during preflight found WX in ewr right at minimums (RVR being reported as non-operational). We finally had a seq report of 1/2 mi and departed, ewr WX we received included NOTAMS and fdc NOTAMS of which for ewr there were none. Upon reaching ewr we held for approximately 1 hour due to traffic and low WX. RVR readings were being given with touchdown and M/D working but rollout inoperative (for runway 22L). We finally shot approach to runway 22L with RVR 2000 ft and landed. Discussions in crew room that night discovered that there was a NOTAM in commercial publication NOTAM section that raised minimums on the runway 22L approach to 4000 RVR. That being the case we should not have shot the approach. A few things come to mind on this problem: 1) how many different places should I have to look to gather NOTAM information? 2) something as important as raised minimums should be right out in front of your face so you can't miss it. 3) we are allowed to sub touchdown RVR with M/D RVR if touchdown inoperative. I assume other carriers can do the same. That being the case we should have been using runway 4R. I would think ATC would be in the loop and be using a runway legal to land on. Would also think that if minimums are raised for an approach in use it could be included in ATIS remarks. In discussing this with others it has been said that this NOTAM problem has been around for yrs, with no action by FAA to solve it. Seems an easy fix and should be done as soon as possible. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that another pilot had discovered the NOTAM and this became a topic of discussion in the pilot lounge. Flcs became aware that the operations manual states that each flight crew must look at the NOTAMS for each flight. Reporter had been unaware of this requirement. He now does things a little differently than before. Reporter still believes that it is complicated to have so many pieces of material to reference when actually flying and not smart to try and memorize the NOTAMS in case a runway change is made at the last min. He also believes it is not so bad under normal flight but when things get tight and one is concerned about WX and/or fuel and/or whether to divert or hold, etc, then it becomes a real problem to have to reference so many places for information. After this incident, the company published this information in their NOTAMS for 2 weeks, but it is no longer there. Reporter feels the reason commercial chart does not change the approach plate is that the NOTAM is temporary due to construction near the airport and a crane rising nearby.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LANDS WITH NOTAM OF HIGHER MINIMUMS. THEY WERE NOT LEGAL TO LAND.

Narrative: SCHEDULED TO FLY FROM SYR TO EWR. IN SYR DURING PREFLT FOUND WX IN EWR RIGHT AT MINIMUMS (RVR BEING RPTED AS NON-OPERATIONAL). WE FINALLY HAD A SEQ RPT OF 1/2 MI AND DEPARTED, EWR WX WE RECEIVED INCLUDED NOTAMS AND FDC NOTAMS OF WHICH FOR EWR THERE WERE NONE. UPON REACHING EWR WE HELD FOR APPROX 1 HR DUE TO TFC AND LOW WX. RVR READINGS WERE BEING GIVEN WITH TOUCHDOWN AND M/D WORKING BUT ROLLOUT INOP (FOR RWY 22L). WE FINALLY SHOT APCH TO RWY 22L WITH RVR 2000 FT AND LANDED. DISCUSSIONS IN CREW ROOM THAT NIGHT DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS A NOTAM IN COMMERCIAL PUB NOTAM SECTION THAT RAISED MINIMUMS ON THE RWY 22L APCH TO 4000 RVR. THAT BEING THE CASE WE SHOULD NOT HAVE SHOT THE APCH. A FEW THINGS COME TO MIND ON THIS PROB: 1) HOW MANY DIFFERENT PLACES SHOULD I HAVE TO LOOK TO GATHER NOTAM INFO? 2) SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS RAISED MINIMUMS SHOULD BE RIGHT OUT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE SO YOU CAN'T MISS IT. 3) WE ARE ALLOWED TO SUB TOUCHDOWN RVR WITH M/D RVR IF TOUCHDOWN INOP. I ASSUME OTHER CARRIERS CAN DO THE SAME. THAT BEING THE CASE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN USING RWY 4R. I WOULD THINK ATC WOULD BE IN THE LOOP AND BE USING A RWY LEGAL TO LAND ON. WOULD ALSO THINK THAT IF MINIMUMS ARE RAISED FOR AN APCH IN USE IT COULD BE INCLUDED IN ATIS REMARKS. IN DISCUSSING THIS WITH OTHERS IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THIS NOTAM PROB HAS BEEN AROUND FOR YRS, WITH NO ACTION BY FAA TO SOLVE IT. SEEMS AN EASY FIX AND SHOULD BE DONE ASAP. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT ANOTHER PLT HAD DISCOVERED THE NOTAM AND THIS BECAME A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION IN THE PLT LOUNGE. FLCS BECAME AWARE THAT THE OPS MANUAL STATES THAT EACH FLC MUST LOOK AT THE NOTAMS FOR EACH FLT. RPTR HAD BEEN UNAWARE OF THIS REQUIREMENT. HE NOW DOES THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN BEFORE. RPTR STILL BELIEVES THAT IT IS COMPLICATED TO HAVE SO MANY PIECES OF MATERIAL TO REF WHEN ACTUALLY FLYING AND NOT SMART TO TRY AND MEMORIZE THE NOTAMS IN CASE A RWY CHANGE IS MADE AT THE LAST MIN. HE ALSO BELIEVES IT IS NOT SO BAD UNDER NORMAL FLT BUT WHEN THINGS GET TIGHT AND ONE IS CONCERNED ABOUT WX AND/OR FUEL AND/OR WHETHER TO DIVERT OR HOLD, ETC, THEN IT BECOMES A REAL PROB TO HAVE TO REF SO MANY PLACES FOR INFO. AFTER THIS INCIDENT, THE COMPANY PUBLISHED THIS INFO IN THEIR NOTAMS FOR 2 WKS, BUT IT IS NO LONGER THERE. RPTR FEELS THE REASON COMMERCIAL CHART DOES NOT CHANGE THE APCH PLATE IS THAT THE NOTAM IS TEMPORARY DUE TO CONSTRUCTION NEAR THE ARPT AND A CRANE RISING NEARBY.

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.