Narrative:

Xwinds at tpa were very near the aircraft limits for the main runways (18R/left) at our arrival time. ATC offered a visual to runway 27. We looked at our airport page and saw that the runway was almost 7000 ft long and had a PAPI for guidance. I flew the visual approach and landed normally. Not wanting to overheat the brakes (we had a short turn); I rolled to the end of the runway before clearing. After we took off for our next flight; we noticed a note on the back of the airport page stating that the last 499 ft of runway 27 were not usable for landing. No mention of unable to use for takeoff; just landing. I don't know what would cause a runway to not be usable for landing at the far end. According to the chart; you are able to taxi on it for takeoff; but maybe not for landing. At takeoff; you're heavier than at landing. I understand why you wouldn't want to use parts of runways at the beginning of a takeoff roll due to jetblast issues; and for landing due to the stressing of the concrete needed to support the actual touchdown; but this makes no sense. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter understands that there is no weight restriction on this runway. The reason for the shorter runway landing distance is because the overrun/stopway is very short. The FAA circular AC 150/5300-13 establishes the required runway length for planning landing distance and available takeoff stop distance calculations. If no overrun/stopway is available then part of the paved runway is used for planning purposes and may shorten the actual runway available for takeoff and landing.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AFTER LNDG ON TPA RWY 27 AND ROLLING THE FULL 6999 FT RWY LENGTH AN ACR PILOT SAW THAT THE LAST 499 FT WERE NOT AVAILABLE FOR LNDG. IT WAS PART OF STOPWAY DISTANCE CALCULATION.

Narrative: XWINDS AT TPA WERE VERY NEAR THE ACFT LIMITS FOR THE MAIN RWYS (18R/L) AT OUR ARR TIME. ATC OFFERED A VISUAL TO RWY 27. WE LOOKED AT OUR ARPT PAGE AND SAW THAT THE RWY WAS ALMOST 7000 FT LONG AND HAD A PAPI FOR GUIDANCE. I FLEW THE VISUAL APCH AND LANDED NORMALLY. NOT WANTING TO OVERHEAT THE BRAKES (WE HAD A SHORT TURN); I ROLLED TO THE END OF THE RWY BEFORE CLRING. AFTER WE TOOK OFF FOR OUR NEXT FLT; WE NOTICED A NOTE ON THE BACK OF THE ARPT PAGE STATING THAT THE LAST 499 FT OF RWY 27 WERE NOT USABLE FOR LNDG. NO MENTION OF UNABLE TO USE FOR TKOF; JUST LNDG. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD CAUSE A RWY TO NOT BE USABLE FOR LNDG AT THE FAR END. ACCORDING TO THE CHART; YOU ARE ABLE TO TAXI ON IT FOR TKOF; BUT MAYBE NOT FOR LNDG. AT TKOF; YOU'RE HEAVIER THAN AT LNDG. I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO USE PARTS OF RWYS AT THE BEGINNING OF A TKOF ROLL DUE TO JETBLAST ISSUES; AND FOR LNDG DUE TO THE STRESSING OF THE CONCRETE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE ACTUAL TOUCHDOWN; BUT THIS MAKES NO SENSE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: REPORTER UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE IS NO WEIGHT RESTRICTION ON THIS RWY. THE REASON FOR THE SHORTER RWY LANDING DISTANCE IS BECAUSE THE OVERRUN/STOPWAY IS VERY SHORT. THE FAA CIRCULAR AC 150/5300-13 ESTABLISHES THE REQUIRED RWY LENGTH FOR PLANNING LNDG DISTANCE AND AVAILABLE TKOF STOP DISTANCE CALCULATIONS. IF NO OVERRUN/STOPWAY IS AVAILABLE THEN PART OF THE PAVED RWY IS USED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES AND MAY SHORTEN THE ACTUAL RWY AVAILABLE FOR TKOF AND LNDG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.