Narrative:

After picking up a patient, flight Z departed for the hospital. After informing approach that we had the hospital in sight, radar service was terminated. We proceeded to set up for our approach into the pad located directly in front of the emergency room north of the hospital. I have landed on this pad at least 3 other times, the last visit was approximately 4 months earlier. On final, the air crew notified satcom that we were on final. Based on the winds, I elected a southwest approach. My approach was a little steeper than normal because of the light poles and vehicles that were in the parking lots around the pad. My primary focus during the approach was on these obstacles, not directly at the pad. On short final, approximately 100-150 ft AGL, I noticed a pale yellowish 'X' across the pad. My air crew didn't notice the 'X' until that time as well. The pad was clear and we landed uneventfully. After we had landed, we were told to repos on the roof pad since that was where the stretcher was located. We did so. After landing, I talked to hospital security and administration and they informed me that the pad had been closed for about a month. I told them that I did not know the pad was closed, since I never saw any NOTAM highlighting its closure. I called satcom to see if there was a NOTAM or if they had any information on the closure of the pad. They did not. I asked the hospital for information on the new pad. The hospital gave me a point of contact who did have specifications for the new roof pad. I relayed the name to satcom. Subsequently, satcom released a NOTAM a couple of days later. I feel 3 things could have avoided flight Z from landing on a pad that was closed. First, it is ultimately the pilot's responsibility to be vigilant and scan everything so he can make the right decision on whether to land on a pad or not. An 'X' on a landing surface, regardless of how bright it is, can only mean one thing -- that landing surface is not operational. I've been flying long enough to know this. When I first noticed the 'X' on short final, I should have waved off and called satcom who could have called the hospital for clarification. Second, it is critical to ensure any change to a facility is disseminated quickly to all who use the facility. The company didn't have any information on this pad closure, so they couldn't send out a company NOTAM. Third, I have seen some hospitals place orange/white cones across a pad to further highlight its closure. This landing to a closed pad was uneventful. However, had there been another reason for the pad being closed, other than relocating it to the roof, the landing could have ended with other than normal results.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AS55 PLT LANDS ON CLOSED HOSPITAL HELIPAD.

Narrative: AFTER PICKING UP A PATIENT, FLT Z DEPARTED FOR THE HOSPITAL. AFTER INFORMING APCH THAT WE HAD THE HOSPITAL IN SIGHT, RADAR SVC WAS TERMINATED. WE PROCEEDED TO SET UP FOR OUR APCH INTO THE PAD LOCATED DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE EMER ROOM N OF THE HOSPITAL. I HAVE LANDED ON THIS PAD AT LEAST 3 OTHER TIMES, THE LAST VISIT WAS APPROX 4 MONTHS EARLIER. ON FINAL, THE AIR CREW NOTIFIED SATCOM THAT WE WERE ON FINAL. BASED ON THE WINDS, I ELECTED A SW APCH. MY APCH WAS A LITTLE STEEPER THAN NORMAL BECAUSE OF THE LIGHT POLES AND VEHICLES THAT WERE IN THE PARKING LOTS AROUND THE PAD. MY PRIMARY FOCUS DURING THE APCH WAS ON THESE OBSTACLES, NOT DIRECTLY AT THE PAD. ON SHORT FINAL, APPROX 100-150 FT AGL, I NOTICED A PALE YELLOWISH 'X' ACROSS THE PAD. MY AIR CREW DIDN'T NOTICE THE 'X' UNTIL THAT TIME AS WELL. THE PAD WAS CLR AND WE LANDED UNEVENTFULLY. AFTER WE HAD LANDED, WE WERE TOLD TO REPOS ON THE ROOF PAD SINCE THAT WAS WHERE THE STRETCHER WAS LOCATED. WE DID SO. AFTER LNDG, I TALKED TO HOSPITAL SECURITY AND ADMINISTRATION AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THE PAD HAD BEEN CLOSED FOR ABOUT A MONTH. I TOLD THEM THAT I DID NOT KNOW THE PAD WAS CLOSED, SINCE I NEVER SAW ANY NOTAM HIGHLIGHTING ITS CLOSURE. I CALLED SATCOM TO SEE IF THERE WAS A NOTAM OR IF THEY HAD ANY INFO ON THE CLOSURE OF THE PAD. THEY DID NOT. I ASKED THE HOSPITAL FOR INFO ON THE NEW PAD. THE HOSPITAL GAVE ME A POINT OF CONTACT WHO DID HAVE SPECS FOR THE NEW ROOF PAD. I RELAYED THE NAME TO SATCOM. SUBSEQUENTLY, SATCOM RELEASED A NOTAM A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER. I FEEL 3 THINGS COULD HAVE AVOIDED FLT Z FROM LNDG ON A PAD THAT WAS CLOSED. FIRST, IT IS ULTIMATELY THE PLT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO BE VIGILANT AND SCAN EVERYTHING SO HE CAN MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION ON WHETHER TO LAND ON A PAD OR NOT. AN 'X' ON A LNDG SURFACE, REGARDLESS OF HOW BRIGHT IT IS, CAN ONLY MEAN ONE THING -- THAT LNDG SURFACE IS NOT OPERATIONAL. I'VE BEEN FLYING LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW THIS. WHEN I FIRST NOTICED THE 'X' ON SHORT FINAL, I SHOULD HAVE WAVED OFF AND CALLED SATCOM WHO COULD HAVE CALLED THE HOSPITAL FOR CLARIFICATION. SECOND, IT IS CRITICAL TO ENSURE ANY CHANGE TO A FACILITY IS DISSEMINATED QUICKLY TO ALL WHO USE THE FACILITY. THE COMPANY DIDN'T HAVE ANY INFO ON THIS PAD CLOSURE, SO THEY COULDN'T SEND OUT A COMPANY NOTAM. THIRD, I HAVE SEEN SOME HOSPITALS PLACE ORANGE/WHITE CONES ACROSS A PAD TO FURTHER HIGHLIGHT ITS CLOSURE. THIS LNDG TO A CLOSED PAD WAS UNEVENTFUL. HOWEVER, HAD THERE BEEN ANOTHER REASON FOR THE PAD BEING CLOSED, OTHER THAN RELOCATING IT TO THE ROOF, THE LNDG COULD HAVE ENDED WITH OTHER THAN NORMAL RESULTS.

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.