Narrative:

Following an ILS approach to runway 11 at bed the PF landed the aircraft in the touchdown zone. Maximum reverse thrust was utilized, but the captain reported that braking efforts were not decelerating the aircraft. Again maximum reverse was continuously employed until the captain reduced to idle reverse at slow speed in order to maintain directional control of the aircraft. Nosewheel steering provided the only measurable directional control. Efforts to stop the aircraft continued which reduced the speed to approximately 1-2 mph when the airplane departed the departure end of runway 11, an estimated 36 inches from the runway surface. The aircraft was inspected and no damage was the result. Per manufacturer's recommendations, maintenance technicians returned the aircraft to service following inspection and resulting in no damage or repairs. A similar aircraft landed prior to our arrival and reported braking as fair to poor. Following our landing, an airport test vehicle reported braking as poor, our braking was nil. While our aircraft was being towed, the airport auths began to immediately sand all runway and taxi surfaces. I feel that given the same circumstances the event could have been avoided by a better, more frequent testing system and more judicious use of sand to aid braking effectiveness.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CPR GULFSTREAM II FLC RAN OFF THE END OF RWY 11 AT BED WHEN BRAKING ACTION PROVES TO BE INSUFFICIENT TO STOP ON THE PAVED SURFACE. THE ARPT PERSONNEL SANDED THE RWY AFTER THIS INCIDENT.

Narrative: FOLLOWING AN ILS APCH TO RWY 11 AT BED THE PF LANDED THE ACFT IN THE TOUCHDOWN ZONE. MAX REVERSE THRUST WAS UTILIZED, BUT THE CAPT RPTED THAT BRAKING EFFORTS WERE NOT DECELERATING THE ACFT. AGAIN MAX REVERSE WAS CONTINUOUSLY EMPLOYED UNTIL THE CAPT REDUCED TO IDLE REVERSE AT SLOW SPD IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CTL OF THE ACFT. NOSEWHEEL STEERING PROVIDED THE ONLY MEASURABLE DIRECTIONAL CTL. EFFORTS TO STOP THE ACFT CONTINUED WHICH REDUCED THE SPD TO APPROX 1-2 MPH WHEN THE AIRPLANE DEPARTED THE DEP END OF RWY 11, AN ESTIMATED 36 INCHES FROM THE RWY SURFACE. THE ACFT WAS INSPECTED AND NO DAMAGE WAS THE RESULT. PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS, MAINT TECHNICIANS RETURNED THE ACFT TO SVC FOLLOWING INSPECTION AND RESULTING IN NO DAMAGE OR REPAIRS. A SIMILAR ACFT LANDED PRIOR TO OUR ARR AND RPTED BRAKING AS FAIR TO POOR. FOLLOWING OUR LNDG, AN ARPT TEST VEHICLE RPTED BRAKING AS POOR, OUR BRAKING WAS NIL. WHILE OUR ACFT WAS BEING TOWED, THE ARPT AUTHS BEGAN TO IMMEDIATELY SAND ALL RWY AND TAXI SURFACES. I FEEL THAT GIVEN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES THE EVENT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED BY A BETTER, MORE FREQUENT TESTING SYS AND MORE JUDICIOUS USE OF SAND TO AID BRAKING EFFECTIVENESS.

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.