Narrative:

At the conclusion of my BFR chkride and instrument competency check, my instructor asked if he could shoot the runway 17L ILS approach at pie and I agreed, I worked the radio and he flew the airplane. Control cleared us to land and instructed us to 'hold short of runway 04.' I repeated the clear-to-land and hold short instructions. As the pilot flying the airplane started to flare the airplane, I did a final check of the 'gear down' lights and noticed that the nose gear light appeared to not be illuminated and I stated this to the PF. He touched down the main gear and immediately initiated a go around. The controller asked why we were not holding short as instructed and sounded very upset. I told her that we had to go map and would circle to land. During this maneuver, we overflew runway 04 at approximately 300-400 ft. The controller instructed us to enter a downwind for runway 09 and upon doing so, we found that adjusting the rheostat for the panel lights illuminated the nose landing gear light more brightly. A normal landing on runway 09 ended without incident. Upon arriving at the FBO, the PF (my CFI) was told to call the tower, wherein he explained the situation. The tower (ATC manager) explained that the pie tower is a training facility and thus must report the incident. There was not a near-miss situation nor were any evasive maneuvers performed by any aircraft. The controller was upset that we did not comply with the hold short instructions, but the PIC deemed it necessary to go around. Although I would hate to see it, if there is a common occurrence of aircraft practicing approachs on one runway interfering with normal operations at airport for various reasons, ie, unforseen mechanical problems requiring gars, the operation, or procedures, at that airport should be revised.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR FAILED TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY AS PER TWR INSTRUCTIONS. JUST PRIOR TO TOUCHDOWN NOTICED NOSE GEAR DOWN AND LOCKED LIGHT NOT ILLUMINATED. EXECUTED BALKED LNDG.

Narrative: AT THE CONCLUSION OF MY BFR CHKRIDE AND INST COMPETENCY CHK, MY INSTRUCTOR ASKED IF HE COULD SHOOT THE RWY 17L ILS APCH AT PIE AND I AGREED, I WORKED THE RADIO AND HE FLEW THE AIRPLANE. CTL CLRED US TO LAND AND INSTRUCTED US TO 'HOLD SHORT OF RWY 04.' I REPEATED THE CLR-TO-LAND AND HOLD SHORT INSTRUCTIONS. AS THE PLT FLYING THE AIRPLANE STARTED TO FLARE THE AIRPLANE, I DID A FINAL CHK OF THE 'GEAR DOWN' LIGHTS AND NOTICED THAT THE NOSE GEAR LIGHT APPEARED TO NOT BE ILLUMINATED AND I STATED THIS TO THE PF. HE TOUCHED DOWN THE MAIN GEAR AND IMMEDIATELY INITIATED A GAR. THE CTLR ASKED WHY WE WERE NOT HOLDING SHORT AS INSTRUCTED AND SOUNDED VERY UPSET. I TOLD HER THAT WE HAD TO GO MAP AND WOULD CIRCLE TO LAND. DURING THIS MANEUVER, WE OVERFLEW RWY 04 AT APPROX 300-400 FT. THE CTLR INSTRUCTED US TO ENTER A DOWNWIND FOR RWY 09 AND UPON DOING SO, WE FOUND THAT ADJUSTING THE RHEOSTAT FOR THE PANEL LIGHTS ILLUMINATED THE NOSE LNDG GEAR LIGHT MORE BRIGHTLY. A NORMAL LNDG ON RWY 09 ENDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. UPON ARRIVING AT THE FBO, THE PF (MY CFI) WAS TOLD TO CALL THE TWR, WHEREIN HE EXPLAINED THE SIT. THE TWR (ATC MGR) EXPLAINED THAT THE PIE TWR IS A TRAINING FACILITY AND THUS MUST RPT THE INCIDENT. THERE WAS NOT A NEAR-MISS SIT NOR WERE ANY EVASIVE MANEUVERS PERFORMED BY ANY ACFT. THE CTLR WAS UPSET THAT WE DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE HOLD SHORT INSTRUCTIONS, BUT THE PIC DEEMED IT NECESSARY TO GAR. ALTHOUGH I WOULD HATE TO SEE IT, IF THERE IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE OF ACFT PRACTICING APCHS ON ONE RWY INTERFERING WITH NORMAL OPS AT ARPT FOR VARIOUS REASONS, IE, UNFORSEEN MECHANICAL PROBS REQUIRING GARS, THE OP, OR PROCS, AT THAT ARPT SHOULD BE REVISED.

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.