Narrative:

Upon arriving at gulkana; and to take advantage of good WX and better runway facilities (according to the alaska supplement and anc sectional); I elected to change my final destination to northway; instead of tok. Possessing both a current alaska supplement and anc sectional; I checked all information therein; noting that the supplement indicated for northway that 'runway condition not monitored. Recommend visual inspection prior to landing.' I then called the FSS from gulkana to change my flight plan; indicating to the briefer that I was in gulkana; and was changing my final destination to northway from tok. The briefer acknowledged the change in flight plan and told me; 'have a good flight.' the briefer did not indicate there were any NOTAMS for northway. Nor is this NOTAM published in the us DOT FAA notices to airmen; domestic/international. With a call to flight service for a briefing; an active flight plan; a communicated change to that flight plan; a check of all current supplement and sectional documentation; and a comprehensive personal flight plan with contingencies including extra fuel and a new alternate airport (tok); I assumed I had completed all pre-flight due diligence related to flight planning that could possibly be completed prior to the next leg with the facilities and documentation at my disposal. I departed gulkana XA30 and arrived at northway XB30. Upon arriving at northway; after announcing my intentions approximately 10 and 5 miles out on the CTAF; and descending to a pattern altitude from which an emergency landing could be safely executed; I flew over the complete length of runway 5/23; slightly off centerline; visually inspecting the runway surface and surrounding snow; parking apron; taxiway and ski strip. The 'ski strip' as it is called in the supplement; was at the location indicated in the supplement. Furthermore; runway 5/23 was bordered by survey stakes; and had cones apparently marking a taxiway from the center of runway 5/23 to the north; connecting to the apron. The cone bases were exposed; indicating they were not buried in snow; indicating they might be sitting on an acceptable landing surface. Both the main runway and 'ski strip' appeared to have the same snow surface. Neither runway had large berms on the runway sides; however; this is not indicative of plowing in all cases; as the berms could have easily been removed with a snow blower. I did not attempt to activate any runway lights; since daylight conditions and clear skies persisted. I turned for a right downwind; to avoid flying over the facilities and radio/light tower adjacent to the apron; again inspecting the runway surface of the main runway and ski strip on downwind; while continually broadcasting my position and intention on the CTAF. Upon setting up for final approach and getting closer to the snow; I configured for a normal landing; again announcing my intentions on the CTAF. Approaching the runway surface; on center with the stakes apparently marking the runway boundary; I again examined the cones near the middle of the runway; apparently indicating the taxiway turnoff to the apron; I again noted the complete body of the cones was above the snow surface; as indicated by the visibility of the base of the cone. Upon touching down; the aircraft immediately pitched forward and settled into about 9 inches of snow; coming to a stop quickly. The aircraft was not damaged in any way; and none of the occupants (2 total) experienced any injury. The landing roll was about 130 ft. After landing and realizing that the runway had not been plowed; an FAA contract staff member in the facility adjacent to the runway said he had heard me on the CTAF but was too busy talking to someone else to let me know that runway 5/23 was closed. It is important to note that the CTAF is tied into fairbanks FSS. He asked on the radio why I had landed on a closed runway. I responded that I was on an active flight plan and had received a briefing; which did not include any NOTAMS for a closed runway. He asked who the briefing was from; and I indicated who it was from. He indicated he would call the local 'airport lodge' to see if they could find someone to help me get the aircraft off the runway. Eventually; a lodge truck was used to plow a small taxiway; which I then used to exit the closed runway under aircraft power. From visual inspection; as recommended by the ak supplement; there was absolutely no obvious indication from the air that the runway was closed. Cone markers indicated a mid-field taxiway exit; stakes indicated the runway boundary; the 'ski strip' was in the proper location; and all other visual indications matched either the current ak supplement or the anchorage sectional. Upon contacting fairbanks FSS the next day for a briefing for a departing flight; the briefer said; 'so you know about the runways at northway... Only the ski strip is open.' I indicated to the briefer that I was now clearly aware of the runway situation; and the 'ski strip' was in fact the main runway and had been packed and plowed for wheel operations. Calling the main runway the 'ski strip' is very poor practice and can lead to misunderstandings quickly. In discussion with a pilot who landed about an hour after me on the 'ski strip;' he indicated that he was confused when he received a briefing for his flight because the briefer identified the main runway was closed and the 'ski strip' was open. The pilot told me that he indicated to the briefer that he was on wheels and could not use a 'ski strip.' the briefer then explained that the ski strip was being used as the main runway and was packed for wheel use. Certainly; had my briefing contained the NOTAM for northway; I would have not landed on a closed runway. My landing on the closed runway was most certainly inadvertent. I planned extensively and obtained all information that was available to me at the time to conduct a safe and successful flight. Visual inspection for snow coverage is often misleading; and is inadequate as the only means to indicate a runway closure of this nature at this location. The closed runway at northway needs to be more clearly marked. Vertical markings that are not obscured by snow; such as a large vertical 'X;' as used at many other airports with snow cover and closed runway(south) need to be installed to clearly indicate the runway closure. FSS staff need to ensure they provide pilots heading to northway with the NOTAM for the runway closure. I have been informed that a number of other pilots have landed on the closed runway; one of them almost hitting a grader. Furthermore; this runway has been closed and under construction since 2001. 7 years is more than enough for the FAA to add brief notation to the ak supplement addressing the runway closure. Most certainly; this NOTAM needs to be published in the us DOT FAA notices to airmen; domestic/international. This may have contributed to the failure of communication of this NOTAM from FSS to the pilot.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CESSNA PILOT REPORTS LANDING ON CLOSED RUNWAY AT ORT DUE TO LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF NOTAM CLOSING RUNWAY. AIRCRAFT IS IMMEDIATELY STUCK IN SNOW.

Narrative: UPON ARRIVING AT GULKANA; AND TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF GOOD WX AND BETTER RWY FACILITIES (ACCORDING TO THE ALASKA SUPPLEMENT AND ANC SECTIONAL); I ELECTED TO CHANGE MY FINAL DEST TO NORTHWAY; INSTEAD OF TOK. POSSESSING BOTH A CURRENT ALASKA SUPPLEMENT AND ANC SECTIONAL; I CHECKED ALL INFO THEREIN; NOTING THAT THE SUPPLEMENT INDICATED FOR NORTHWAY THAT 'RWY CONDITION NOT MONITORED. RECOMMEND VISUAL INSPECTION PRIOR TO LANDING.' I THEN CALLED THE FSS FROM GULKANA TO CHANGE MY FLT PLAN; INDICATING TO THE BRIEFER THAT I WAS IN GULKANA; AND WAS CHANGING MY FINAL DEST TO NORTHWAY FROM TOK. THE BRIEFER ACKNOWLEDGED THE CHANGE IN FLT PLAN AND TOLD ME; 'HAVE A GOOD FLT.' THE BRIEFER DID NOT INDICATE THERE WERE ANY NOTAMS FOR NORTHWAY. NOR IS THIS NOTAM PUBLISHED IN THE US DOT FAA NOTICES TO AIRMEN; DOMESTIC/INTERNATIONAL. WITH A CALL TO FLT SERVICE FOR A BRIEFING; AN ACTIVE FLT PLAN; A COMMUNICATED CHANGE TO THAT FLT PLAN; A CHECK OF ALL CURRENT SUPPLEMENT AND SECTIONAL DOCUMENTATION; AND A COMPREHENSIVE PERSONAL FLT PLAN WITH CONTINGENCIES INCLUDING EXTRA FUEL AND A NEW ALTERNATE ARPT (TOK); I ASSUMED I HAD COMPLETED ALL PRE-FLT DUE DILIGENCE RELATED TO FLT PLANNING THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE NEXT LEG WITH THE FACILITIES AND DOCUMENTATION AT MY DISPOSAL. I DEPARTED GULKANA XA30 AND ARRIVED AT NORTHWAY XB30. UPON ARRIVING AT NORTHWAY; AFTER ANNOUNCING MY INTENTIONS APPROX 10 AND 5 MILES OUT ON THE CTAF; AND DESCENDING TO A PATTERN ALTITUDE FROM WHICH AN EMER LANDING COULD BE SAFELY EXECUTED; I FLEW OVER THE COMPLETE LENGTH OF RWY 5/23; SLIGHTLY OFF CTRLINE; VISUALLY INSPECTING THE RWY SURFACE AND SURROUNDING SNOW; PARKING APRON; TXWY AND SKI STRIP. THE 'SKI STRIP' AS IT IS CALLED IN THE SUPPLEMENT; WAS AT THE LOCATION INDICATED IN THE SUPPLEMENT. FURTHERMORE; RWY 5/23 WAS BORDERED BY SURVEY STAKES; AND HAD CONES APPARENTLY MARKING A TXWY FROM THE CENTER OF RWY 5/23 TO THE NORTH; CONNECTING TO THE APRON. THE CONE BASES WERE EXPOSED; INDICATING THEY WERE NOT BURIED IN SNOW; INDICATING THEY MIGHT BE SITTING ON AN ACCEPTABLE LANDING SURFACE. BOTH THE MAIN RWY AND 'SKI STRIP' APPEARED TO HAVE THE SAME SNOW SURFACE. NEITHER RWY HAD LARGE BERMS ON THE RWY SIDES; HOWEVER; THIS IS NOT INDICATIVE OF PLOWING IN ALL CASES; AS THE BERMS COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN REMOVED WITH A SNOW BLOWER. I DID NOT ATTEMPT TO ACTIVATE ANY RWY LIGHTS; SINCE DAYLIGHT CONDITIONS AND CLEAR SKIES PERSISTED. I TURNED FOR A RIGHT DOWNWIND; TO AVOID FLYING OVER THE FACILITIES AND RADIO/LIGHT TOWER ADJACENT TO THE APRON; AGAIN INSPECTING THE RWY SURFACE OF THE MAIN RWY AND SKI STRIP ON DOWNWIND; WHILE CONTINUALLY BROADCASTING MY POSITION AND INTENTION ON THE CTAF. UPON SETTING UP FOR FINAL APCH AND GETTING CLOSER TO THE SNOW; I CONFIGURED FOR A NORMAL LANDING; AGAIN ANNOUNCING MY INTENTIONS ON THE CTAF. APCHING THE RWY SURFACE; ON CENTER WITH THE STAKES APPARENTLY MARKING THE RWY BOUNDARY; I AGAIN EXAMINED THE CONES NEAR THE MIDDLE OF THE RWY; APPARENTLY INDICATING THE TXWY TURNOFF TO THE APRON; I AGAIN NOTED THE COMPLETE BODY OF THE CONES WAS ABOVE THE SNOW SURFACE; AS INDICATED BY THE VISIBILITY OF THE BASE OF THE CONE. UPON TOUCHING DOWN; THE ACFT IMMEDIATELY PITCHED FORWARD AND SETTLED INTO ABOUT 9 INCHES OF SNOW; COMING TO A STOP QUICKLY. THE ACFT WAS NOT DAMAGED IN ANY WAY; AND NONE OF THE OCCUPANTS (2 TOTAL) EXPERIENCED ANY INJURY. THE LANDING ROLL WAS ABOUT 130 FT. AFTER LANDING AND REALIZING THAT THE RWY HAD NOT BEEN PLOWED; AN FAA CONTRACT STAFF MEMBER IN THE FACILITY ADJACENT TO THE RWY SAID HE HAD HEARD ME ON THE CTAF BUT WAS TOO BUSY TALKING TO SOMEONE ELSE TO LET ME KNOW THAT RWY 5/23 WAS CLOSED. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE CTAF IS TIED INTO FAIRBANKS FSS. HE ASKED ON THE RADIO WHY I HAD LANDED ON A CLOSED RWY. I RESPONDED THAT I WAS ON AN ACTIVE FLT PLAN AND HAD RECEIVED A BRIEFING; WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE ANY NOTAMS FOR A CLOSED RWY. HE ASKED WHO THE BRIEFING WAS FROM; AND I INDICATED WHO IT WAS FROM. HE INDICATED HE WOULD CALL THE LOCAL 'ARPT LODGE' TO SEE IF THEY COULD FIND SOMEONE TO HELP ME GET THE ACFT OFF THE RWY. EVENTUALLY; A LODGE TRUCK WAS USED TO PLOW A SMALL TXWY; WHICH I THEN USED TO EXIT THE CLOSED RWY UNDER ACFT POWER. FROM VISUAL INSPECTION; AS RECOMMENDED BY THE AK SUPPLEMENT; THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO OBVIOUS INDICATION FROM THE AIR THAT THE RWY WAS CLOSED. CONE MARKERS INDICATED A MID-FIELD TXWY EXIT; STAKES INDICATED THE RWY BOUNDARY; THE 'SKI STRIP' WAS IN THE PROPER LOCATION; AND ALL OTHER VISUAL INDICATIONS MATCHED EITHER THE CURRENT AK SUPPLEMENT OR THE ANCHORAGE SECTIONAL. UPON CONTACTING FAIRBANKS FSS THE NEXT DAY FOR A BRIEFING FOR A DEPARTING FLT; THE BRIEFER SAID; 'SO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE RWYS AT NORTHWAY... ONLY THE SKI STRIP IS OPEN.' I INDICATED TO THE BRIEFER THAT I WAS NOW CLEARLY AWARE OF THE RWY SITUATION; AND THE 'SKI STRIP' WAS IN FACT THE MAIN RWY AND HAD BEEN PACKED AND PLOWED FOR WHEEL OPS. CALLING THE MAIN RWY THE 'SKI STRIP' IS VERY POOR PRACTICE AND CAN LEAD TO MISUNDERSTANDINGS QUICKLY. IN DISCUSSION WITH A PLT WHO LANDED ABOUT AN HOUR AFTER ME ON THE 'SKI STRIP;' HE INDICATED THAT HE WAS CONFUSED WHEN HE RECEIVED A BRIEFING FOR HIS FLT BECAUSE THE BRIEFER IDENTIFIED THE MAIN RWY WAS CLOSED AND THE 'SKI STRIP' WAS OPEN. THE PLT TOLD ME THAT HE INDICATED TO THE BRIEFER THAT HE WAS ON WHEELS AND COULD NOT USE A 'SKI STRIP.' THE BRIEFER THEN EXPLAINED THAT THE SKI STRIP WAS BEING USED AS THE MAIN RWY AND WAS PACKED FOR WHEEL USE. CERTAINLY; HAD MY BRIEFING CONTAINED THE NOTAM FOR NORTHWAY; I WOULD HAVE NOT LANDED ON A CLOSED RWY. MY LANDING ON THE CLOSED RWY WAS MOST CERTAINLY INADVERTENT. I PLANNED EXTENSIVELY AND OBTAINED ALL INFO THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO ME AT THE TIME TO CONDUCT A SAFE AND SUCCESSFUL FLT. VISUAL INSPECTION FOR SNOW COVERAGE IS OFTEN MISLEADING; AND IS INADEQUATE AS THE ONLY MEANS TO INDICATE A RWY CLOSURE OF THIS NATURE AT THIS LOCATION. THE CLOSED RWY AT NORTHWAY NEEDS TO BE MORE CLEARLY MARKED. VERTICAL MARKINGS THAT ARE NOT OBSCURED BY SNOW; SUCH AS A LARGE VERTICAL 'X;' AS USED AT MANY OTHER ARPTS WITH SNOW COVER AND CLOSED RWY(S) NEED TO BE INSTALLED TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE RWY CLOSURE. FSS STAFF NEED TO ENSURE THEY PROVIDE PLTS HEADING TO NORTHWAY WITH THE NOTAM FOR THE RWY CLOSURE. I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT A NUMBER OF OTHER PLTS HAVE LANDED ON THE CLOSED RWY; ONE OF THEM ALMOST HITTING A GRADER. FURTHERMORE; THIS RWY HAS BEEN CLOSED AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION SINCE 2001. 7 YEARS IS MORE THAN ENOUGH FOR THE FAA TO ADD BRIEF NOTATION TO THE AK SUPPLEMENT ADDRESSING THE RWY CLOSURE. MOST CERTAINLY; THIS NOTAM NEEDS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE US DOT FAA NOTICES TO AIRMEN; DOMESTIC/INTERNATIONAL. THIS MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE FAILURE OF COMMUNICATION OF THIS NOTAM FROM FSS TO THE PLT.

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.