Narrative:

Approach assigned us a heading to intercept and track the localizer for runway 22L inbound and to hold 190 KTS until ayron (ILS FAF) 4.0 DME ijnn. After switching to ewr tower (just prior to ayron), we were cleared for the ILS to runway 22L. I slowed to the final approach speed, was fully configured for landing, and was established on the localizer and GS when we passed over ayron FAF. At approximately +/-2 NM from the approach end of runway 22L, ewr tower changed our landing runway to runway 29 and instructed us to 'keep it tight.' the captain (PNF) acknowledged the runway change, the instructions to 'keep it tight' and I (PF) continued. At this point, we were approximately 1 mi and +/-500 ft AGL. I began looking for the approach end of runway 29, adjusting my track to compensate for the 25 KT crosswind, and aiming for a point just prior to the approach end of runway 29. Initially, I (PF) did not feel uncomfortable with the last min runway change or the tower's request to 'keep it tight.'. Though both of us were busy trying to find the new runway, I felt we had enough time and distance to execute safe landing. However, as I began to adjust my track in an effort to 'keep it tight,' it became apparent to me that I was much closer to the approach end of runway 22L and runway 29 as well. At approximately + -200 ft AGL and 1/2 mi from the approach end of runway 29, I began to execute a maneuver to line up with runway 29. I quickly realized at this point that a steeper than normal bank turn would be required to roll my wings level, line up with the new runway, and land. Also, I heard the 'bank angle' warning announcement one time at this point. I immediately began to roll my wings level and we touched down at a normal descent rate. The landing rollout was unremarkable and I exited the runway at taxiway Z without incident. Looking back at this situation, I realize that accepting this last min runway change with the additional demand of 'keeping it tight' was a mistake. What initially appeared to be a simple, last min runway change, quickly became an unsafe situation requiring more effort and steeper than normal bank angles at low altitude to accomplish. I firmly believe tower's last min decision to change to runway 29, the low altitude (+/-500 ft AGL) at which we were given the change, the multiple requests (2 times) by tower to 'keep it tight,' the close proximity (+/-1 mi) to the approach end of both runways, the 70 degrees of change in runway and landing direction, the industrial haze, the near dusk conditions, as well as the momentary confusion in locating the exact location of the approach end of runway 29 all were contributing factors that made this seemingly normal and safe runway change turn into an uncomfortable, low-altitude, last min, 'keep it tight' maneuver to land. I have learned many valuable lessons from this experience. Should this type situation occur in the future, I will not hesitate to decline such a request or even request a go around should I feel uncomfortable with the situation. Supplemental information from acn 575608: there were aircraft in front and behind and we accepted it to prevent being sent around (mistake #1). The GPWS gave us a bank angle warning and we corrected the angle. We rolled wings level at about 200 ft and proceeded with a normal touchdown and landing. Throughout the maneuver, I was uncomfortable and should have went around (mistake #2). I will never accept it again. I realize tower has a tough job to do, but I hope they will stop doing this.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A TIGHT, LOW, CIRCLING APCH FROM RWY 22L TO RWY 29 IS ASSIGNED TO A LNDG G4 FERRY FLT ON SHORT FINAL TO RWY 22L AND ACCOMPLISHED IN SPITE OF MUCH APPREHENSION BY THE CREW AND AN ALERT FROM THE GPWS AT EWR, NJ.

Narrative: APCH ASSIGNED US A HDG TO INTERCEPT AND TRACK THE LOC FOR RWY 22L INBOUND AND TO HOLD 190 KTS UNTIL AYRON (ILS FAF) 4.0 DME IJNN. AFTER SWITCHING TO EWR TWR (JUST PRIOR TO AYRON), WE WERE CLRED FOR THE ILS TO RWY 22L. I SLOWED TO THE FINAL APCH SPD, WAS FULLY CONFIGURED FOR LNDG, AND WAS ESTABLISHED ON THE LOC AND GS WHEN WE PASSED OVER AYRON FAF. AT APPROX +/-2 NM FROM THE APCH END OF RWY 22L, EWR TWR CHANGED OUR LNDG RWY TO RWY 29 AND INSTRUCTED US TO 'KEEP IT TIGHT.' THE CAPT (PNF) ACKNOWLEDGED THE RWY CHANGE, THE INSTRUCTIONS TO 'KEEP IT TIGHT' AND I (PF) CONTINUED. AT THIS POINT, WE WERE APPROX 1 MI AND +/-500 FT AGL. I BEGAN LOOKING FOR THE APCH END OF RWY 29, ADJUSTING MY TRACK TO COMPENSATE FOR THE 25 KT XWIND, AND AIMING FOR A POINT JUST PRIOR TO THE APCH END OF RWY 29. INITIALLY, I (PF) DID NOT FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE LAST MIN RWY CHANGE OR THE TWR'S REQUEST TO 'KEEP IT TIGHT.'. THOUGH BOTH OF US WERE BUSY TRYING TO FIND THE NEW RWY, I FELT WE HAD ENOUGH TIME AND DISTANCE TO EXECUTE SAFE LNDG. HOWEVER, AS I BEGAN TO ADJUST MY TRACK IN AN EFFORT TO 'KEEP IT TIGHT,' IT BECAME APPARENT TO ME THAT I WAS MUCH CLOSER TO THE APCH END OF RWY 22L AND RWY 29 AS WELL. AT APPROX + -200 FT AGL AND 1/2 MI FROM THE APCH END OF RWY 29, I BEGAN TO EXECUTE A MANEUVER TO LINE UP WITH RWY 29. I QUICKLY REALIZED AT THIS POINT THAT A STEEPER THAN NORMAL BANK TURN WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ROLL MY WINGS LEVEL, LINE UP WITH THE NEW RWY, AND LAND. ALSO, I HEARD THE 'BANK ANGLE' WARNING ANNOUNCEMENT ONE TIME AT THIS POINT. I IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TO ROLL MY WINGS LEVEL AND WE TOUCHED DOWN AT A NORMAL DSCNT RATE. THE LNDG ROLLOUT WAS UNREMARKABLE AND I EXITED THE RWY AT TXWY Z WITHOUT INCIDENT. LOOKING BACK AT THIS SIT, I REALIZE THAT ACCEPTING THIS LAST MIN RWY CHANGE WITH THE ADDITIONAL DEMAND OF 'KEEPING IT TIGHT' WAS A MISTAKE. WHAT INITIALLY APPEARED TO BE A SIMPLE, LAST MIN RWY CHANGE, QUICKLY BECAME AN UNSAFE SIT REQUIRING MORE EFFORT AND STEEPER THAN NORMAL BANK ANGLES AT LOW ALT TO ACCOMPLISH. I FIRMLY BELIEVE TWR'S LAST MIN DECISION TO CHANGE TO RWY 29, THE LOW ALT (+/-500 FT AGL) AT WHICH WE WERE GIVEN THE CHANGE, THE MULTIPLE REQUESTS (2 TIMES) BY TWR TO 'KEEP IT TIGHT,' THE CLOSE PROX (+/-1 MI) TO THE APCH END OF BOTH RWYS, THE 70 DEGS OF CHANGE IN RWY AND LNDG DIRECTION, THE INDUSTRIAL HAZE, THE NEAR DUSK CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS THE MOMENTARY CONFUSION IN LOCATING THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE APCH END OF RWY 29 ALL WERE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS THAT MADE THIS SEEMINGLY NORMAL AND SAFE RWY CHANGE TURN INTO AN UNCOMFORTABLE, LOW-ALT, LAST MIN, 'KEEP IT TIGHT' MANEUVER TO LAND. I HAVE LEARNED MANY VALUABLE LESSONS FROM THIS EXPERIENCE. SHOULD THIS TYPE SIT OCCUR IN THE FUTURE, I WILL NOT HESITATE TO DECLINE SUCH A REQUEST OR EVEN REQUEST A GAR SHOULD I FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE SIT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 575608: THERE WERE ACFT IN FRONT AND BEHIND AND WE ACCEPTED IT TO PREVENT BEING SENT AROUND (MISTAKE #1). THE GPWS GAVE US A BANK ANGLE WARNING AND WE CORRECTED THE ANGLE. WE ROLLED WINGS LEVEL AT ABOUT 200 FT AND PROCEEDED WITH A NORMAL TOUCHDOWN AND LNDG. THROUGHOUT THE MANEUVER, I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE AND SHOULD HAVE WENT AROUND (MISTAKE #2). I WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT AGAIN. I REALIZE TWR HAS A TOUGH JOB TO DO, BUT I HOPE THEY WILL STOP DOING THIS.

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.