A C172 CFI with a student lands on a closed runway at mer.

Attributes
ACN	627240
Time
Date	200408
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mer.airport
State Reference	CA
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	landing : roll
Route In Use	arrival : vfr
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 10 flight time total : 2500 flight time type : 1000
ASRS Report	627240
Person 2
Affiliation	other
Function	instruction : trainee
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Airport FAA
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

A student and I were doing a training flight from hayward to castle airport (mer). On downwind at castle, I (at atwater, ca) noticed a horizontal line across runway 31 at about the halfway point. There were arrows leading up to it, and it looked like a displaced threshold. I wondered about it because I was not given any NOTAMS in my WX briefing that the runway was shortened. When we got on short final, we saw a large lighted 'X' standing up on the numbers 31. This 'X' was not visible on downwind. We continued to the (apparent) displaced threshold and landed. The first taxiway off the runway was closed, so we continued to the next one, near the end of the runway. From there we could see the 'X' at the runway 13 threshold. From the ground, it looked like the entire runway was closed, though that was not at all clear from the air. All the txwys from the closed runway were blocked. We worked our way off the closed runway and noticed a poorly marked temporary runway had been built on a parallel taxiway. We used that runway for departure without incident. The closed runway should have been marked as a closed runway. I should have received a NOTAM about the runway closure and temporary runway. From now on, when I see a runway that is marked in a non-standard way, I will fly over the runway to check it out or ask someone on unicom about it. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that he did obtain a WX briefing from FSS. In this briefing there was no mention of the closed runway or the alternate runway at mer. Reporter said that there were runway markings that appeared to be a displaced threshold and that there were 2 'X's,' one at both ends of the runway. After the reporter landed he realized that the taxiway exits were blocked and he had to maneuver to get off the runway. He did depart on the taxiway/runway. The reporter recommends that there be NOTAMS about this airport and that the runway closure be marked in a standard way.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C172 CFI WITH A STUDENT LANDS ON A CLOSED RWY AT MER.

Narrative: A STUDENT AND I WERE DOING A TRAINING FLT FROM HAYWARD TO CASTLE ARPT (MER). ON DOWNWIND AT CASTLE, I (AT ATWATER, CA) NOTICED A HORIZ LINE ACROSS RWY 31 AT ABOUT THE HALFWAY POINT. THERE WERE ARROWS LEADING UP TO IT, AND IT LOOKED LIKE A DISPLACED THRESHOLD. I WONDERED ABOUT IT BECAUSE I WAS NOT GIVEN ANY NOTAMS IN MY WX BRIEFING THAT THE RWY WAS SHORTENED. WHEN WE GOT ON SHORT FINAL, WE SAW A LARGE LIGHTED 'X' STANDING UP ON THE NUMBERS 31. THIS 'X' WAS NOT VISIBLE ON DOWNWIND. WE CONTINUED TO THE (APPARENT) DISPLACED THRESHOLD AND LANDED. THE FIRST TXWY OFF THE RWY WAS CLOSED, SO WE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT ONE, NEAR THE END OF THE RWY. FROM THERE WE COULD SEE THE 'X' AT THE RWY 13 THRESHOLD. FROM THE GND, IT LOOKED LIKE THE ENTIRE RWY WAS CLOSED, THOUGH THAT WAS NOT AT ALL CLR FROM THE AIR. ALL THE TXWYS FROM THE CLOSED RWY WERE BLOCKED. WE WORKED OUR WAY OFF THE CLOSED RWY AND NOTICED A POORLY MARKED TEMPORARY RWY HAD BEEN BUILT ON A PARALLEL TXWY. WE USED THAT RWY FOR DEP WITHOUT INCIDENT. THE CLOSED RWY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MARKED AS A CLOSED RWY. I SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A NOTAM ABOUT THE RWY CLOSURE AND TEMPORARY RWY. FROM NOW ON, WHEN I SEE A RWY THAT IS MARKED IN A NON-STANDARD WAY, I WILL FLY OVER THE RWY TO CHK IT OUT OR ASK SOMEONE ON UNICOM ABOUT IT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE DID OBTAIN A WX BRIEFING FROM FSS. IN THIS BRIEFING THERE WAS NO MENTION OF THE CLOSED RWY OR THE ALTERNATE RWY AT MER. RPTR SAID THAT THERE WERE RWY MARKINGS THAT APPEARED TO BE A DISPLACED THRESHOLD AND THAT THERE WERE 2 'X'S,' ONE AT BOTH ENDS OF THE RWY. AFTER THE RPTR LANDED HE REALIZED THAT THE TXWY EXITS WERE BLOCKED AND HE HAD TO MANEUVER TO GET OFF THE RWY. HE DID DEPART ON THE TXWY/RWY. THE RPTR RECOMMENDS THAT THERE BE NOTAMS ABOUT THIS ARPT AND THAT THE RWY CLOSURE BE MARKED IN A STANDARD WAY.

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.