Narrative:

NOTAM referring to first 3000 ft of 11000 ft runway being close was missed by me. So first and foremost, it was an error caused by my oversight. I landed approximately 500 ft short of new displaced threshold. I take full responsibility for the operational error. The error however, was not discovered until taxi out for the next flight when I taxied past the new threshold for runway. Contributing factors: on a line check with check airman on jumpseat -- too much company business being discussed en route. All 3 pilots missed the fact that first 3000 ft of runway 32 closed. Even with missing NOTAM it still could have been prevented except on short final when aiming for 1000 ft mark, there was an air carrier on departure end of runway doing a 180 degree turn to clear runway -- I shifted my attention to it. My attention was diverted from approach end of runway to departure end. I decided to land a bit long anyway to delay touchdown to 1ST third of runway giving him time to clear. I did not see the poorly marked runway indicating displaced threshold. The runway 32 original markings were very clear. The aircraft on runway was the last chance being missed to prevent operational error. Here are my solutions that could have prevented the error (other than the obvious error of me missing the NOTAM). 1) during dispatcher/pilot brief, NOTAM affecting the landing runway should be discussed. It was not. 2) ATIS should broadcast the NOTAM especially if it is the active runway. It was not. 3) approach plate should depict closure. It was not. 4) displaced threshold arrows should be very distinct. They were not. 5) bring NOTAMS that have safety issues concerning active runway at destination to the section of release next to MEL's/captain's signature area. 6) tower should: 'cleared to land runway 32 displaced threshold.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DURING A LINE CHK, AN A321 PIC LANDS ON THE CLOSED PORTION OF RWY 32 AT MYNN, FO.

Narrative: NOTAM REFERRING TO FIRST 3000 FT OF 11000 FT RWY BEING CLOSE WAS MISSED BY ME. SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, IT WAS AN ERROR CAUSED BY MY OVERSIGHT. I LANDED APPROX 500 FT SHORT OF NEW DISPLACED THRESHOLD. I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE OPERROR. THE ERROR HOWEVER, WAS NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL TAXI OUT FOR THE NEXT FLT WHEN I TAXIED PAST THE NEW THRESHOLD FOR RWY. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: ON A LINE CHK WITH CHK AIRMAN ON JUMPSEAT -- TOO MUCH COMPANY BUSINESS BEING DISCUSSED ENRTE. ALL 3 PLTS MISSED THE FACT THAT FIRST 3000 FT OF RWY 32 CLOSED. EVEN WITH MISSING NOTAM IT STILL COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED EXCEPT ON SHORT FINAL WHEN AIMING FOR 1000 FT MARK, THERE WAS AN ACR ON DEP END OF RWY DOING A 180 DEG TURN TO CLR RWY -- I SHIFTED MY ATTN TO IT. MY ATTN WAS DIVERTED FROM APCH END OF RWY TO DEP END. I DECIDED TO LAND A BIT LONG ANYWAY TO DELAY TOUCHDOWN TO 1ST THIRD OF RWY GIVING HIM TIME TO CLR. I DID NOT SEE THE POORLY MARKED RWY INDICATING DISPLACED THRESHOLD. THE RWY 32 ORIGINAL MARKINGS WERE VERY CLR. THE ACFT ON RWY WAS THE LAST CHANCE BEING MISSED TO PREVENT OPERROR. HERE ARE MY SOLUTIONS THAT COULD HAVE PREVENTED THE ERROR (OTHER THAN THE OBVIOUS ERROR OF ME MISSING THE NOTAM). 1) DURING DISPATCHER/PLT BRIEF, NOTAM AFFECTING THE LNDG RWY SHOULD BE DISCUSSED. IT WAS NOT. 2) ATIS SHOULD BROADCAST THE NOTAM ESPECIALLY IF IT IS THE ACTIVE RWY. IT WAS NOT. 3) APCH PLATE SHOULD DEPICT CLOSURE. IT WAS NOT. 4) DISPLACED THRESHOLD ARROWS SHOULD BE VERY DISTINCT. THEY WERE NOT. 5) BRING NOTAMS THAT HAVE SAFETY ISSUES CONCERNING ACTIVE RWY AT DEST TO THE SECTION OF RELEASE NEXT TO MEL'S/CAPT'S SIGNATURE AREA. 6) TWR SHOULD: 'CLRED TO LAND RWY 32 DISPLACED THRESHOLD.'

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.