Narrative:

I was scheduled to fly my passenger, in his aircraft, from ft worth, tx, to san marcus, tx, for business on the morning of jun/wed/03. After receiving my second WX briefing of the morning, including all relevant NOTAMS, I filed an IFR flight plan to san marcus. After we boarded the aircraft and I was preparing to pick up my clearance from ft worth spinks clearance delivery, my passenger told me that we had a change of destination to boerne. I called clearance delivery and informed him of the change, it was duly made, my clearance copied, and we were on our way to boerne. After canceling the flight plan a few mi from the boerne airport and executing a visual approach, including all proper radio xmissions throughout the entire pattern with no response, I made an uneventful landing. While on my rollout about midway down the runway, I noticed a cessna with landing gear not extended and sitting on its belly on an exit-way between the runway and the taxiway. A crew was in the process of removing the cessna from its location. The gear up landing had occurred the evening before, prompting the issuance of a local NOTAM. The NOTAM apparently was still in effect when I unexpectedly had to change my destination from san marcus to boerne. Since I had already been through the process of obtaining a briefing and local NOTAMS for san marcus, requesting additional local NOTAMS simply did not occur to me. This oversight was my fault, but it was absolutely unintentional. I presume that the nature of the local NOTAM was advising of a closed airport since there was a disabled aircraft, at that time, on the runway. Although the event resulted in no problem, an FAA inspector investigating the gear up incident did interrogate me and took the customary, official data and information. I believe that the cause of my failure to obtain local NOTAMS for the new destination was due to my mental satisfaction of already having been through a proper and thorough preflight briefing process. I offer this only as a reason, not as an excuse. I feel that the prevention of future such scenarios lies in giving concerted thought to this fact: a change has occurred in my flight situation. What additions or other modifications should or must I consider or make?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C340 LANDS AT ARPT WITH RWY NOTAMED CLOSED.

Narrative: I WAS SCHEDULED TO FLY MY PAX, IN HIS ACFT, FROM FT WORTH, TX, TO SAN MARCUS, TX, FOR BUSINESS ON THE MORNING OF JUN/WED/03. AFTER RECEIVING MY SECOND WX BRIEFING OF THE MORNING, INCLUDING ALL RELEVANT NOTAMS, I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN TO SAN MARCUS. AFTER WE BOARDED THE ACFT AND I WAS PREPARING TO PICK UP MY CLRNC FROM FT WORTH SPINKS CLRNC DELIVERY, MY PAX TOLD ME THAT WE HAD A CHANGE OF DEST TO BOERNE. I CALLED CLRNC DELIVERY AND INFORMED HIM OF THE CHANGE, IT WAS DULY MADE, MY CLRNC COPIED, AND WE WERE ON OUR WAY TO BOERNE. AFTER CANCELING THE FLT PLAN A FEW MI FROM THE BOERNE ARPT AND EXECUTING A VISUAL APCH, INCLUDING ALL PROPER RADIO XMISSIONS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PATTERN WITH NO RESPONSE, I MADE AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG. WHILE ON MY ROLLOUT ABOUT MIDWAY DOWN THE RWY, I NOTICED A CESSNA WITH LNDG GEAR NOT EXTENDED AND SITTING ON ITS BELLY ON AN EXIT-WAY BTWN THE RWY AND THE TXWY. A CREW WAS IN THE PROCESS OF REMOVING THE CESSNA FROM ITS LOCATION. THE GEAR UP LNDG HAD OCCURRED THE EVENING BEFORE, PROMPTING THE ISSUANCE OF A LCL NOTAM. THE NOTAM APPARENTLY WAS STILL IN EFFECT WHEN I UNEXPECTEDLY HAD TO CHANGE MY DEST FROM SAN MARCUS TO BOERNE. SINCE I HAD ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS OF OBTAINING A BRIEFING AND LCL NOTAMS FOR SAN MARCUS, REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LCL NOTAMS SIMPLY DID NOT OCCUR TO ME. THIS OVERSIGHT WAS MY FAULT, BUT IT WAS ABSOLUTELY UNINTENTIONAL. I PRESUME THAT THE NATURE OF THE LCL NOTAM WAS ADVISING OF A CLOSED ARPT SINCE THERE WAS A DISABLED ACFT, AT THAT TIME, ON THE RWY. ALTHOUGH THE EVENT RESULTED IN NO PROB, AN FAA INSPECTOR INVESTIGATING THE GEAR UP INCIDENT DID INTERROGATE ME AND TOOK THE CUSTOMARY, OFFICIAL DATA AND INFO. I BELIEVE THAT THE CAUSE OF MY FAILURE TO OBTAIN LCL NOTAMS FOR THE NEW DEST WAS DUE TO MY MENTAL SATISFACTION OF ALREADY HAVING BEEN THROUGH A PROPER AND THOROUGH PREFLT BRIEFING PROCESS. I OFFER THIS ONLY AS A REASON, NOT AS AN EXCUSE. I FEEL THAT THE PREVENTION OF FUTURE SUCH SCENARIOS LIES IN GIVING CONCERTED THOUGHT TO THIS FACT: A CHANGE HAS OCCURRED IN MY FLT SIT. WHAT ADDITIONS OR OTHER MODIFICATIONS SHOULD OR MUST I CONSIDER OR MAKE?

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.