Narrative:

On aug/thu/96, I was taking a commercial pilot multi-engine practical test. We were completing the examination with a single-engine ILS approach and landing at dpa. I listened to the ATIS and contacted chicago approach and requested vectors for the ILS runway 1L. I was told to maintain VFR at or below 3000 ft and was given a squawk code. I listened to the ATIS again. The WX was reported 4600 ft broken and visibility greater than 6 mi. There was also a NOTAM about runway 10/28 being closed and ILS 10/28 being OTS. I don't recall any other NOTAM information. Shortly after being vectored, I was 'cleared for the approach.' I heard chicago approach control working another plane in, behind us, and was asked to keep my speed up. I was handed off to dpa tower at the FAF, spnce. I put my gear down at spnce and was 'cleared to land runway 1L.' anticipating the landing, I slowed to 100 mph. I was then told by tower that approach wanted us to keep our speed up. I complied by keeping it at 100 mph, but could not exceed this speed (vfo/vfe). Tower proceeded to inform us that if we did not keep our speed up, we would have to go around. My examiner, mr. X, suggested a solution to dpa tower: perhaps we could sidestep to runway 1R. Tower then 'cleared (us) to sidestep runway 1R.' I then heard communication between the tower and the aircraft behind us, who chose to circle to runway 33. After landing, and while taxiing to the west t-hangars, I was still unaware of any problems other than the traffic congestion previously encountered. Just before reaching our destination, we were told to contact tower for possible pilot deviation. My examiner called the cabin attendant and was informed that the runway we had just landed on was closed. This surprised me since we had been 'cleared to sidestep runway 1R.' supplemental information from acn 343150: I did notice mowers approximately 200 ft to the side of the runway and thought this strange, but since we had been cleared did not say anything to the applicant. See attached for questions that might help make corrective actions to prevent this from recurring. If we were cleared to land, why would we be told if we can't keep our speed up we have to go around? We were vectored first and cleared to land. Shouldn't the aircraft following have to slow down, or they go around? A twin cessna can slow down to 100 KTS with no problems? The applicant was cleared to land and also cleared for the sidestep maneuver, a sidestep maneuver clears you to land on the parallel runway. Why did the dpa controller tell me on the phone he didn't know we were landing when he had issued a landing clearance for runway 1L?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA TWIN LANDS ON CLOSED RWY. FLC SAYS THEY WERE CLRED TO LAND, TWR CTLR SAYS NOT.

Narrative: ON AUG/THU/96, I WAS TAKING A COMMERCIAL PLT MULTI-ENG PRACTICAL TEST. WE WERE COMPLETING THE EXAM WITH A SINGLE-ENG ILS APCH AND LNDG AT DPA. I LISTENED TO THE ATIS AND CONTACTED CHICAGO APCH AND REQUESTED VECTORS FOR THE ILS RWY 1L. I WAS TOLD TO MAINTAIN VFR AT OR BELOW 3000 FT AND WAS GIVEN A SQUAWK CODE. I LISTENED TO THE ATIS AGAIN. THE WX WAS RPTED 4600 FT BROKEN AND VISIBILITY GREATER THAN 6 MI. THERE WAS ALSO A NOTAM ABOUT RWY 10/28 BEING CLOSED AND ILS 10/28 BEING OTS. I DON'T RECALL ANY OTHER NOTAM INFO. SHORTLY AFTER BEING VECTORED, I WAS 'CLRED FOR THE APCH.' I HEARD CHICAGO APCH CTL WORKING ANOTHER PLANE IN, BEHIND US, AND WAS ASKED TO KEEP MY SPD UP. I WAS HANDED OFF TO DPA TWR AT THE FAF, SPNCE. I PUT MY GEAR DOWN AT SPNCE AND WAS 'CLRED TO LAND RWY 1L.' ANTICIPATING THE LNDG, I SLOWED TO 100 MPH. I WAS THEN TOLD BY TWR THAT APCH WANTED US TO KEEP OUR SPD UP. I COMPLIED BY KEEPING IT AT 100 MPH, BUT COULD NOT EXCEED THIS SPD (VFO/VFE). TWR PROCEEDED TO INFORM US THAT IF WE DID NOT KEEP OUR SPD UP, WE WOULD HAVE TO GAR. MY EXAMINER, MR. X, SUGGESTED A SOLUTION TO DPA TWR: PERHAPS WE COULD SIDESTEP TO RWY 1R. TWR THEN 'CLRED (US) TO SIDESTEP RWY 1R.' I THEN HEARD COM BTWN THE TWR AND THE ACFT BEHIND US, WHO CHOSE TO CIRCLE TO RWY 33. AFTER LNDG, AND WHILE TAXIING TO THE W T-HANGARS, I WAS STILL UNAWARE OF ANY PROBS OTHER THAN THE TFC CONGESTION PREVIOUSLY ENCOUNTERED. JUST BEFORE REACHING OUR DEST, WE WERE TOLD TO CONTACT TWR FOR POSSIBLE PLTDEV. MY EXAMINER CALLED THE CABIN ATTENDANT AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE RWY WE HAD JUST LANDED ON WAS CLOSED. THIS SURPRISED ME SINCE WE HAD BEEN 'CLRED TO SIDESTEP RWY 1R.' SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 343150: I DID NOTICE MOWERS APPROX 200 FT TO THE SIDE OF THE RWY AND THOUGHT THIS STRANGE, BUT SINCE WE HAD BEEN CLRED DID NOT SAY ANYTHING TO THE APPLICANT. SEE ATTACHED FOR QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT HELP MAKE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO PREVENT THIS FROM RECURRING. IF WE WERE CLRED TO LAND, WHY WOULD WE BE TOLD IF WE CAN'T KEEP OUR SPD UP WE HAVE TO GAR? WE WERE VECTORED FIRST AND CLRED TO LAND. SHOULDN'T THE ACFT FOLLOWING HAVE TO SLOW DOWN, OR THEY GAR? A TWIN CESSNA CAN SLOW DOWN TO 100 KTS WITH NO PROBS? THE APPLICANT WAS CLRED TO LAND AND ALSO CLRED FOR THE SIDESTEP MANEUVER, A SIDESTEP MANEUVER CLRS YOU TO LAND ON THE PARALLEL RWY. WHY DID THE DPA CTLR TELL ME ON THE PHONE HE DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE LNDG WHEN HE HAD ISSUED A LNDG CLRNC FOR RWY 1L?

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.