Narrative:

We were on an IFR flight plan from mqy to lci. Lci has no control tower. We were vectored to line up on the ILS to runway 8. The winds were reported on AWOS to be 190 degrees at 9 KTS; giving us a 110 degree crosswind. We reported the airport in sight to bos approach. We were cleared for a visual approach and subsequently canceled our IFR. We continued on the ILS to runway 8 reporting final on CTAF 123.00. We heard no other traffic reporting. We reported short final at 500 ft altitude (approximately 1.5 mi out). We landed on runway 8. On rollout; we noticed a single engine cessna on the runway facing us. He had landed unnoticed on runway 26. He had seen our landing lights and turned off onto the grass on the right side of runway 26. We made a turn to the right side of runway 8. Upon our passing; the cessna regained the hard surface. We both taxied to the ramp. We were extremely fortunate that there was no damage to either aircraft or injury. The cessna pilot started asking for radio checks while taxiing in. We responded as did base operations. The cessna pilot acknowledged base operations often -- several attempts -- and inquired as to whether he had heard his downwind; base; and final calls. Base operations had only heard his calls for a radio check. We were at fault for not having done an overhead pattern. The actual windsock favored runway 26. It was brought to our attention by the cessna pilot that communications were not a requirement at uncontrolled airports. More time and emphasis needs to be placed on operating into and out of uncontrolled airports; by operators like ours. Too many of us are of the opinion that calls on CTAF are sufficient. It is all too easy to be on the wrong frequency or in the vicinity of an aircraft that has no radios. An overhead look at the airport gives an opportunity to determine the best runway in terms of wind and to look for any additional traffic in the pattern. Supplemental information from acn 664439: the citation X was landing on runway 8 the same time I was landing on runway 26; a mi-long runway; at laconia; nh. The citation apparently made a straight-in approach to runway 8. We were both on landing rolls and heading for each other on the runway. After the incident; I asked for a radio check. At first; I heard no reply; but as I approached the ramp area the radio seemed to work normally. A person from the FBO later informed me that he did not hear any of my calls until I was in the ramp area. The pilots of the citation also reported that they did not hear any of my calls before they landed; and I did not hear any of their calls. I used radio #2 for xmissions on the unicom frequency at laconia and radio #1 for monitoring the AWOS at laconia. Apparently; radio #2 was not transmitting or receiving as I neared lci; but I was not aware of this at the time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CESSNA CITATION AND C172 LAND SIMULTANEOUSLY IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS ON RWY 8-26 AT LCI.

Narrative: WE WERE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM MQY TO LCI. LCI HAS NO CTL TWR. WE WERE VECTORED TO LINE UP ON THE ILS TO RWY 8. THE WINDS WERE RPTED ON AWOS TO BE 190 DEGS AT 9 KTS; GIVING US A 110 DEG XWIND. WE RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT TO BOS APCH. WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH AND SUBSEQUENTLY CANCELED OUR IFR. WE CONTINUED ON THE ILS TO RWY 8 RPTING FINAL ON CTAF 123.00. WE HEARD NO OTHER TFC RPTING. WE RPTED SHORT FINAL AT 500 FT ALT (APPROX 1.5 MI OUT). WE LANDED ON RWY 8. ON ROLLOUT; WE NOTICED A SINGLE ENG CESSNA ON THE RWY FACING US. HE HAD LANDED UNNOTICED ON RWY 26. HE HAD SEEN OUR LNDG LIGHTS AND TURNED OFF ONTO THE GRASS ON THE R SIDE OF RWY 26. WE MADE A TURN TO THE R SIDE OF RWY 8. UPON OUR PASSING; THE CESSNA REGAINED THE HARD SURFACE. WE BOTH TAXIED TO THE RAMP. WE WERE EXTREMELY FORTUNATE THAT THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO EITHER ACFT OR INJURY. THE CESSNA PLT STARTED ASKING FOR RADIO CHKS WHILE TAXIING IN. WE RESPONDED AS DID BASE OPS. THE CESSNA PLT ACKNOWLEDGED BASE OPS OFTEN -- SEVERAL ATTEMPTS -- AND INQUIRED AS TO WHETHER HE HAD HEARD HIS DOWNWIND; BASE; AND FINAL CALLS. BASE OPS HAD ONLY HEARD HIS CALLS FOR A RADIO CHK. WE WERE AT FAULT FOR NOT HAVING DONE AN OVERHEAD PATTERN. THE ACTUAL WINDSOCK FAVORED RWY 26. IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTN BY THE CESSNA PLT THAT COMS WERE NOT A REQUIREMENT AT UNCTLED ARPTS. MORE TIME AND EMPHASIS NEEDS TO BE PLACED ON OPERATING INTO AND OUT OF UNCTLED ARPTS; BY OPERATORS LIKE OURS. TOO MANY OF US ARE OF THE OPINION THAT CALLS ON CTAF ARE SUFFICIENT. IT IS ALL TOO EASY TO BE ON THE WRONG FREQ OR IN THE VICINITY OF AN ACFT THAT HAS NO RADIOS. AN OVERHEAD LOOK AT THE ARPT GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO DETERMINE THE BEST RWY IN TERMS OF WIND AND TO LOOK FOR ANY ADDITIONAL TFC IN THE PATTERN. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 664439: THE CITATION X WAS LNDG ON RWY 8 THE SAME TIME I WAS LNDG ON RWY 26; A MI-LONG RWY; AT LACONIA; NH. THE CITATION APPARENTLY MADE A STRAIGHT-IN APCH TO RWY 8. WE WERE BOTH ON LNDG ROLLS AND HEADING FOR EACH OTHER ON THE RWY. AFTER THE INCIDENT; I ASKED FOR A RADIO CHK. AT FIRST; I HEARD NO REPLY; BUT AS I APCHED THE RAMP AREA THE RADIO SEEMED TO WORK NORMALLY. A PERSON FROM THE FBO LATER INFORMED ME THAT HE DID NOT HEAR ANY OF MY CALLS UNTIL I WAS IN THE RAMP AREA. THE PLTS OF THE CITATION ALSO RPTED THAT THEY DID NOT HEAR ANY OF MY CALLS BEFORE THEY LANDED; AND I DID NOT HEAR ANY OF THEIR CALLS. I USED RADIO #2 FOR XMISSIONS ON THE UNICOM FREQ AT LACONIA AND RADIO #1 FOR MONITORING THE AWOS AT LACONIA. APPARENTLY; RADIO #2 WAS NOT XMITTING OR RECEIVING AS I NEARED LCI; BUT I WAS NOT AWARE OF THIS AT THE TIME.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.