Narrative:

How the problem arose: after receiving a flight briefing from FSS 3 times I departed VFR from 43OK to 6k4, wellston to fairview, ok, to attend the fly-in there. The WX was reported and forecast en route to be VFR below 1200 ft (the FBO at 6k4 confirmed via phone 1200 ft ceilings and 5 mi visibility just prior to departure) and patches of IFR above that and it was that until I approached 6k4 at less than 700 ft AGL. At about 5 mi from 6k4 the visibility started deteriorating rapidly. An effort to contact the nearest tower, FSS center, or unicom for special VFR clearance failed, due probably to the low altitude and distance. With visibility well above 1 mi but changing fast the airport appeared about 3 mi ahead. I elected in the interest of safety to continue to land instead of going to the alternate airport which may have worse WX. The visibility at landing was more than 1 mi. With about zero chance of any IFR traffic at this airport landing seemed like the best choice. After landing an FAA operations representative asked to see my pilot license, medical, and if I had received a preflight briefing. I showed him and said yes, 3 briefings actually. He said the field was IFR with visibility less than 1 mi. I pointed out some trees on the north end of the field which were quite visible and asked if that was 1 mi or not. He said 'I don't think so' and that I would be hearing from the FAA and walked off all huffed up. Subsequent measurement from the extreme south end of the field, from which the trees were still quite visible, to the trees was over 1.5 mi. 3 other current pilots at the airport at that time have verified in writing it is their opinion that the visibility was over 1 mi at the time of my landing and the rotating beacon was not on. At no time during the flight was there any doubt as to its successful completion. The only problems were my inability to contact ATC for clearance at 6k4 even though it is not needed in class G airspace with more than 1 mi visibility and my decision to land instead of continuing into deteriorating conditions. Contributing factors: fast changing WX. Distance to nearest ATC facility preventing timely communications. Differences in perceptions of distance.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AFTER AN L8 PLT LANDED AT 6K4 ARPT VFR WITH VISIBILITY ESTIMATED TO BE AT APPROX 1 MI, HE WAS MET BY AN FAA OPS REPRESENTATIVE WHO DISAGREED THE VISIBILITY WAS AT LEAST 1 MI.

Narrative: HOW THE PROB AROSE: AFTER RECEIVING A FLT BRIEFING FROM FSS 3 TIMES I DEPARTED VFR FROM 43OK TO 6K4, WELLSTON TO FAIRVIEW, OK, TO ATTEND THE FLY-IN THERE. THE WX WAS RPTED AND FORECAST ENRTE TO BE VFR BELOW 1200 FT (THE FBO AT 6K4 CONFIRMED VIA PHONE 1200 FT CEILINGS AND 5 MI VISIBILITY JUST PRIOR TO DEP) AND PATCHES OF IFR ABOVE THAT AND IT WAS THAT UNTIL I APCHED 6K4 AT LESS THAN 700 FT AGL. AT ABOUT 5 MI FROM 6K4 THE VISIBILITY STARTED DETERIORATING RAPIDLY. AN EFFORT TO CONTACT THE NEAREST TWR, FSS CTR, OR UNICOM FOR SPECIAL VFR CLRNC FAILED, DUE PROBABLY TO THE LOW ALT AND DISTANCE. WITH VISIBILITY WELL ABOVE 1 MI BUT CHANGING FAST THE ARPT APPEARED ABOUT 3 MI AHEAD. I ELECTED IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY TO CONTINUE TO LAND INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE ALTERNATE ARPT WHICH MAY HAVE WORSE WX. THE VISIBILITY AT LNDG WAS MORE THAN 1 MI. WITH ABOUT ZERO CHANCE OF ANY IFR TFC AT THIS ARPT LNDG SEEMED LIKE THE BEST CHOICE. AFTER LNDG AN FAA OPS REPRESENTATIVE ASKED TO SEE MY PLT LICENSE, MEDICAL, AND IF I HAD RECEIVED A PREFLT BRIEFING. I SHOWED HIM AND SAID YES, 3 BRIEFINGS ACTUALLY. HE SAID THE FIELD WAS IFR WITH VISIBILITY LESS THAN 1 MI. I POINTED OUT SOME TREES ON THE N END OF THE FIELD WHICH WERE QUITE VISIBLE AND ASKED IF THAT WAS 1 MI OR NOT. HE SAID 'I DON'T THINK SO' AND THAT I WOULD BE HEARING FROM THE FAA AND WALKED OFF ALL HUFFED UP. SUBSEQUENT MEASUREMENT FROM THE EXTREME S END OF THE FIELD, FROM WHICH THE TREES WERE STILL QUITE VISIBLE, TO THE TREES WAS OVER 1.5 MI. 3 OTHER CURRENT PLTS AT THE ARPT AT THAT TIME HAVE VERIFIED IN WRITING IT IS THEIR OPINION THAT THE VISIBILITY WAS OVER 1 MI AT THE TIME OF MY LNDG AND THE ROTATING BEACON WAS NOT ON. AT NO TIME DURING THE FLT WAS THERE ANY DOUBT AS TO ITS SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION. THE ONLY PROBS WERE MY INABILITY TO CONTACT ATC FOR CLRNC AT 6K4 EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT NEEDED IN CLASS G AIRSPACE WITH MORE THAN 1 MI VISIBILITY AND MY DECISION TO LAND INSTEAD OF CONTINUING INTO DETERIORATING CONDITIONS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: FAST CHANGING WX. DISTANCE TO NEAREST ATC FACILITY PREVENTING TIMELY COMS. DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTIONS OF DISTANCE.

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.