Air carrier lands with clearance on runway not visible from the tower.

Attributes
ACN	449408
Time
Date	199909
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : cos.airport
State Reference	CO
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : cos.tracon tower : cos.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B727 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	landing : roll
Route In Use	approach : visual
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air taxi
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : cfi pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 13000 flight time type : 4000
ASRS Report	449408
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Airport
Primary Problem	Airport

Narrative:

Approaching cos during descent and talking to approach control, we were informed that we would be vectored for a visual approach runway 17R. ATIS did not mention that runway 17L was closed and/or that the runway 17L localizer and GS was OTS, so we questioned approach control why we couldn't use runway 17L. She said we could, but that since cos had a temporary tower and could not see all of runway 17L, we could shoot the approach, but that the landing 'was at our own risk' (her statement). After discussing with the crew the safety benefits of having a GS, localizer, longer runway, better runway lighting all in hilly terrain, we felt the 'risk' was acceptable and informed ATC that we would prefer runway 17L for approach and landing. We received vectors for the approach to runway 17L and when approach control handed us off to cos tower, we were told we could use runway 17L but since he could not see its entire length, it would be at 'our own risk.' I questioned tower if he would like me to call cos unicom and he said there was no need since there was no traffic in the area. Our landing was uneventful and we reported clear of the runway to tower who then cleared us to our gate.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LANDS WITH CLRNC ON RWY NOT VISIBLE FROM THE TWR.

Narrative: APCHING COS DURING DSCNT AND TALKING TO APCH CTL, WE WERE INFORMED THAT WE WOULD BE VECTORED FOR A VISUAL APCH RWY 17R. ATIS DID NOT MENTION THAT RWY 17L WAS CLOSED AND/OR THAT THE RWY 17L LOC AND GS WAS OTS, SO WE QUESTIONED APCH CTL WHY WE COULDN'T USE RWY 17L. SHE SAID WE COULD, BUT THAT SINCE COS HAD A TEMPORARY TWR AND COULD NOT SEE ALL OF RWY 17L, WE COULD SHOOT THE APCH, BUT THAT THE LNDG 'WAS AT OUR OWN RISK' (HER STATEMENT). AFTER DISCUSSING WITH THE CREW THE SAFETY BENEFITS OF HAVING A GS, LOC, LONGER RWY, BETTER RWY LIGHTING ALL IN HILLY TERRAIN, WE FELT THE 'RISK' WAS ACCEPTABLE AND INFORMED ATC THAT WE WOULD PREFER RWY 17L FOR APCH AND LNDG. WE RECEIVED VECTORS FOR THE APCH TO RWY 17L AND WHEN APCH CTL HANDED US OFF TO COS TWR, WE WERE TOLD WE COULD USE RWY 17L BUT SINCE HE COULD NOT SEE ITS ENTIRE LENGTH, IT WOULD BE AT 'OUR OWN RISK.' I QUESTIONED TWR IF HE WOULD LIKE ME TO CALL COS UNICOM AND HE SAID THERE WAS NO NEED SINCE THERE WAS NO TFC IN THE AREA. OUR LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL AND WE RPTED CLR OF THE RWY TO TWR WHO THEN CLRED US TO OUR GATE.

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.