Narrative:

Hawker 700, with me as PIC, overran the departure end of runway 27R on landing roll oak. The aircraft was slowed enough to penetrate the overrun by only 50 ft, but it could have been much worse. The flight approached oak, after a 3.5 hour flight. This was the middle of the night for us. I wanted to show the copilot that a flare and idle power over the approach overrun was not required in a jet. The ILS was flown with 69% power with full flaps. Airspeed was reference +10 KTS. No changes were made from the FAF on. Now things happened that should have caused me to abandon the demonstration: 1) the runway available is 5400 ft. I thought I had 8000 ft. The ILS made the available runway 4400 ft and I anticipated 1000 ft of float. 2) over the numbers, that little voice considered reducing power, but that would defeat the demonstration. The wide runway at night looked long enough (classic). 3) in ground effect, everything looked good until the copilot observed the end of the runway approaching. I lowered the nose, expecting the wheels to touch and pulled the power to idle. Unfortunately, I had flared high over a dark runway (another classic) and was still in ground effect. Lowering the nose further put the wheels smoothly onto the runway with about 2000 ft left. 4) the aircraft slowed with full braking and lift dump, but went off the end of the runway surface onto the overrun, which appeared to be gravel. After coming to a full stop, the brakes were released and I made a 180 degree turn back to the runway. Power was not required to taxi and no jolts or bumps were felt in the cockpit. 5) parked at the FBO, we inspected the aircraft for immediate damage, but could find none. I called the tower on the radio and asked for a landline. I called the tower and explained that I had departed the end of the runway. I was informed that the area was once a high speed taxiway, which had been closed. No report was required. 6) the next day I again inspected the aircraft for any sign of damage, but found only scratched tires. I called my operations officer and related the entire incident. Prevention possibilities: some mention of runway available should have been briefed. We briefed landing distance, but some mention of actual available would have disproved my assumption of 8000 ft. The thought of power reduction should have raised a flag for me. I will discontinue any and all demonstrations when experience raises questions. Demonstrations at night should be discontinued, period. I don't recall seeing runway remaining markers. They would have been a welcome cue. Classic higher than normal flare and the effects of night lighting are understood, but I still fell for both perceptions. What happened to go around? I should have gone around on the sic's question. As soon as I accepted leaving the runway, I searched for a high speed or taxiway to use, but could see none. I saw a marker which appeared to be about 3 ft high, in the middle of the runway, and turned to the right to avoid it. Tower made me feel better about a formal inquiry, but didn't lessen the potential of the action. No damage to brakes, brake lines, flaps, etc, was fine for the time, but daylight could show otherwise. Daylight inspection confirmed no damage. Should a mechanic have made that inspection?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN H25-700 CAPT, MAKING A PWR ON LNDG DEMONSTRATION IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT ON A RWY HE THOUGHT WAS 8000 FT LONG BUT WAS ONLY 5453 FT LONG, OVERRAN THE DEP END OF RWY 27R AT OAK.

Narrative: HAWKER 700, WITH ME AS PIC, OVERRAN THE DEP END OF RWY 27R ON LNDG ROLL OAK. THE ACFT WAS SLOWED ENOUGH TO PENETRATE THE OVERRUN BY ONLY 50 FT, BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH WORSE. THE FLT APCHED OAK, AFTER A 3.5 HR FLT. THIS WAS THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT FOR US. I WANTED TO SHOW THE COPLT THAT A FLARE AND IDLE PWR OVER THE APCH OVERRUN WAS NOT REQUIRED IN A JET. THE ILS WAS FLOWN WITH 69% PWR WITH FULL FLAPS. AIRSPD WAS REF +10 KTS. NO CHANGES WERE MADE FROM THE FAF ON. NOW THINGS HAPPENED THAT SHOULD HAVE CAUSED ME TO ABANDON THE DEMONSTRATION: 1) THE RWY AVAILABLE IS 5400 FT. I THOUGHT I HAD 8000 FT. THE ILS MADE THE AVAILABLE RWY 4400 FT AND I ANTICIPATED 1000 FT OF FLOAT. 2) OVER THE NUMBERS, THAT LITTLE VOICE CONSIDERED REDUCING PWR, BUT THAT WOULD DEFEAT THE DEMONSTRATION. THE WIDE RWY AT NIGHT LOOKED LONG ENOUGH (CLASSIC). 3) IN GND EFFECT, EVERYTHING LOOKED GOOD UNTIL THE COPLT OBSERVED THE END OF THE RWY APCHING. I LOWERED THE NOSE, EXPECTING THE WHEELS TO TOUCH AND PULLED THE PWR TO IDLE. UNFORTUNATELY, I HAD FLARED HIGH OVER A DARK RWY (ANOTHER CLASSIC) AND WAS STILL IN GND EFFECT. LOWERING THE NOSE FURTHER PUT THE WHEELS SMOOTHLY ONTO THE RWY WITH ABOUT 2000 FT LEFT. 4) THE ACFT SLOWED WITH FULL BRAKING AND LIFT DUMP, BUT WENT OFF THE END OF THE RWY SURFACE ONTO THE OVERRUN, WHICH APPEARED TO BE GRAVEL. AFTER COMING TO A FULL STOP, THE BRAKES WERE RELEASED AND I MADE A 180 DEG TURN BACK TO THE RWY. PWR WAS NOT REQUIRED TO TAXI AND NO JOLTS OR BUMPS WERE FELT IN THE COCKPIT. 5) PARKED AT THE FBO, WE INSPECTED THE ACFT FOR IMMEDIATE DAMAGE, BUT COULD FIND NONE. I CALLED THE TWR ON THE RADIO AND ASKED FOR A LANDLINE. I CALLED THE TWR AND EXPLAINED THAT I HAD DEPARTED THE END OF THE RWY. I WAS INFORMED THAT THE AREA WAS ONCE A HIGH SPD TXWY, WHICH HAD BEEN CLOSED. NO RPT WAS REQUIRED. 6) THE NEXT DAY I AGAIN INSPECTED THE ACFT FOR ANY SIGN OF DAMAGE, BUT FOUND ONLY SCRATCHED TIRES. I CALLED MY OPS OFFICER AND RELATED THE ENTIRE INCIDENT. PREVENTION POSSIBILITIES: SOME MENTION OF RWY AVAILABLE SHOULD HAVE BEEN BRIEFED. WE BRIEFED LNDG DISTANCE, BUT SOME MENTION OF ACTUAL AVAILABLE WOULD HAVE DISPROVED MY ASSUMPTION OF 8000 FT. THE THOUGHT OF PWR REDUCTION SHOULD HAVE RAISED A FLAG FOR ME. I WILL DISCONTINUE ANY AND ALL DEMONSTRATIONS WHEN EXPERIENCE RAISES QUESTIONS. DEMONSTRATIONS AT NIGHT SHOULD BE DISCONTINUED, PERIOD. I DON'T RECALL SEEING RWY REMAINING MARKERS. THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN A WELCOME CUE. CLASSIC HIGHER THAN NORMAL FLARE AND THE EFFECTS OF NIGHT LIGHTING ARE UNDERSTOOD, BUT I STILL FELL FOR BOTH PERCEPTIONS. WHAT HAPPENED TO GAR? I SHOULD HAVE GONE AROUND ON THE SIC'S QUESTION. AS SOON AS I ACCEPTED LEAVING THE RWY, I SEARCHED FOR A HIGH SPD OR TXWY TO USE, BUT COULD SEE NONE. I SAW A MARKER WHICH APPEARED TO BE ABOUT 3 FT HIGH, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RWY, AND TURNED TO THE R TO AVOID IT. TWR MADE ME FEEL BETTER ABOUT A FORMAL INQUIRY, BUT DIDN'T LESSEN THE POTENTIAL OF THE ACTION. NO DAMAGE TO BRAKES, BRAKE LINES, FLAPS, ETC, WAS FINE FOR THE TIME, BUT DAYLIGHT COULD SHOW OTHERWISE. DAYLIGHT INSPECTION CONFIRMED NO DAMAGE. SHOULD A MECH HAVE MADE THAT INSPECTION?

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.