Narrative:

Operating part 91 on an IFR business flight to lxy. Filed and did not option to receive lxy NOTAM regarding lxy runway 18/36 north 1000 ft closed; since to do so causes a million unrelated NOTAMS. Cancel IFR with act 10 northeast of lxy with airport in sight. WX clear 10+ visibility with light south wind; as usual. On CTAF a departing aircraft warned of first 1000 ft of runway 18 being closed. Turned a two mile final and was unable to see any marking related to a closure or displaced threshold. At one mile could faintly make out a yellow X on the runway approach end of runway 18; and located a barrier (not that I had a heads up) at the 1000 ft mark. A second X located just prior to the barrier was illegible from a one mile final. As a senior airline captain; and veteran GA instructor with air safety experience; my first thought was this is an accident waiting to happen. After landing I discovered that my assessment was incorrect. One mishap has already occurred; and narrowly averted by quick reaction on the part of a pilot operating a medium twin. It is apparent that a reasonable person is unable to differentiate the location of the runway threshold as presently marked under normal daylight conditions. My editorial: accidents are the result of one or more failures of links that form the accident chain. Pilots should be responsible for their link in the chain; rather than the complete accident chain. In this instance the first link failure is accurate and timely receipt of NOTAMS. As we all know; the NOTAM system is broken. Secondly; the airport operator and their consultants have improperly applied runway marking as outlined in advisory circulars under CFR14-150-5340-1. These folks know the markings to be inadequate from unofficial feedback from operator and have failed to address this issue. Corrective action: 1) mark or paint the north 1000 ft of runway 18 with at least two bright yellow X's on a black background that are visible from the air under normal lighting conditions. Alternately; paint yellow chevron markings on the closed pavement per AC's. The present configuration is unacceptable. 2) I am able to receive metars; taf's; and nexrad WX and tfr's in the flight deck; why not airport NOTAMS? Now you know. Please; let us fix the problem before someone is hurt.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: although the reporter is aware of the NOTAM and is familiar with the location of the temporary barrier; it is difficult to locate until on very short final. This barrier consists of water filled; plastic barricades and extends across the entire width of the runway. Apparently the partial runway closure is due to future runway resurfacing. During the resurfacing; the runway is planned for closure with the parallel taxiway planned for a temporary runway.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE33 PLT REPORTS NOTAM'ED PARTIAL RWY CLOSURE IS NOT READILY IDENTIFIABLE ON APCH.

Narrative: OPERATING PART 91 ON AN IFR BUSINESS FLT TO LXY. FILED AND DID NOT OPTION TO RECEIVE LXY NOTAM REGARDING LXY RWY 18/36 N 1000 FT CLOSED; SINCE TO DO SO CAUSES A MILLION UNRELATED NOTAMS. CANCEL IFR WITH ACT 10 NE OF LXY WITH ARPT IN SIGHT. WX CLR 10+ VISIBILITY WITH LIGHT S WIND; AS USUAL. ON CTAF A DEPARTING ACFT WARNED OF FIRST 1000 FT OF RWY 18 BEING CLOSED. TURNED A TWO MILE FINAL AND WAS UNABLE TO SEE ANY MARKING RELATED TO A CLOSURE OR DISPLACED THRESHOLD. AT ONE MILE COULD FAINTLY MAKE OUT A YELLOW X ON THE RWY APCH END OF RWY 18; AND LOCATED A BARRIER (NOT THAT I HAD A HEADS UP) AT THE 1000 FT MARK. A SECOND X LOCATED JUST PRIOR TO THE BARRIER WAS ILLEGIBLE FROM A ONE MILE FINAL. AS A SENIOR AIRLINE CAPT; AND VETERAN GA INSTRUCTOR WITH AIR SAFETY EXPERIENCE; MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS THIS IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. AFTER LNDG I DISCOVERED THAT MY ASSESSMENT WAS INCORRECT. ONE MISHAP HAS ALREADY OCCURRED; AND NARROWLY AVERTED BY QUICK REACTION ON THE PART OF A PILOT OPERATING A MEDIUM TWIN. IT IS APPARENT THAT A REASONABLE PERSON IS UNABLE TO DIFFERENTIATE THE LOCATION OF THE RWY THRESHOLD AS PRESENTLY MARKED UNDER NORMAL DAYLIGHT CONDITIONS. MY EDITORIAL: ACCIDENTS ARE THE RESULT OF ONE OR MORE FAILURES OF LINKS THAT FORM THE ACCIDENT CHAIN. PLTS SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR LINK IN THE CHAIN; RATHER THAN THE COMPLETE ACCIDENT CHAIN. IN THIS INSTANCE THE FIRST LINK FAILURE IS ACCURATE AND TIMELY RECEIPT OF NOTAMS. AS WE ALL KNOW; THE NOTAM SYSTEM IS BROKEN. SECONDLY; THE ARPT OPERATOR AND THEIR CONSULTANTS HAVE IMPROPERLY APPLIED RWY MARKING AS OUTLINED IN ADVISORY CIRCULARS UNDER CFR14-150-5340-1. THESE FOLKS KNOW THE MARKINGS TO BE INADEQUATE FROM UNOFFICIAL FEEDBACK FROM OPERATOR AND HAVE FAILED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. CORRECTIVE ACTION: 1) MARK OR PAINT THE N 1000 FT OF RWY 18 WITH AT LEAST TWO BRIGHT YELLOW X'S ON A BLACK BACKGROUND THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM THE AIR UNDER NORMAL LIGHTING CONDITIONS. ALTERNATELY; PAINT YELLOW CHEVRON MARKINGS ON THE CLOSED PAVEMENT PER AC'S. THE PRESENT CONFIGURATION IS UNACCEPTABLE. 2) I AM ABLE TO RECEIVE METARS; TAF'S; AND NEXRAD WX AND TFR'S IN THE FLT DECK; WHY NOT ARPT NOTAMS? NOW YOU KNOW. PLEASE; LET US FIX THE PROBLEM BEFORE SOMEONE IS HURT.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: ALTHOUGH THE RPTR IS AWARE OF THE NOTAM AND IS FAMILIAR WITH THE LOCATION OF THE TEMPORARY BARRIER; IT IS DIFFICULT TO LOCATE UNTIL ON VERY SHORT FINAL. THIS BARRIER CONSISTS OF WATER FILLED; PLASTIC BARRICADES AND EXTENDS ACROSS THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF THE RWY. APPARENTLY THE PARTIAL RWY CLOSURE IS DUE TO FUTURE RWY RESURFACING. DURING THE RESURFACING; THE RWY IS PLANNED FOR CLOSURE WITH THE PARALLEL TAXIWAY PLANNED FOR A TEMPORARY RWY.

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.