Narrative:

Destination cos. ATIS winds 350 degrees at 20 gusting to 25 KTS. NOTAM runway 17-35 closed. Wind shear alert. Tower cleared aircraft (taildragger) land runway 30. Winds greatly in excess of ATIS winds. Crosswind too strong to align aircraft with runway centerline, even at cruise airspeed. Did not T/D. An attempted landing as cleared would have been unsafe. On go around, informed tower of intentions to landing on parallel taxiway 35, and would accept own risk. Tower came back with 'understand declaring an emergency.' made clear to tower there was no emergency, and repeated intentions. Tower seemed confused, then said, 'I can't clear you to land on taxiway.' this was acknowledged, and again pilot informed tower that pilot would accept own risk. Tower then said, 'exercise caution, land at own risk.' landing accomplished west/O incident. While stopped on ramp asi indicated wind over 40 KTS vs of aircraft 51 KTS. This lack of familiarity with safe alternatives by the tower could very easily have resulted in implicitly encouraging the pilot to make a repeat landing attempt on runway 30, which would have certainly ended in an accident. The tower supervisor was even more confused and less familiar with alternate safe procedures. Unfortunately, this confusion often results in bureaucratic paperwork, which only serves to discourage further the appropriate use of safe alternatives. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: pilot previously informed by a tower controller of 'accept own risk' procedures available on request only to deviate from standard procedures. Has used before with no problem. However, he admitted that he now wishes he had simply gone to an altitude airport.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA LANDED ON TXWY WITHOUT CLRNC AS A SAFETY MEASURE.

Narrative: DEST COS. ATIS WINDS 350 DEGS AT 20 GUSTING TO 25 KTS. NOTAM RWY 17-35 CLOSED. WIND SHEAR ALERT. TWR CLRED ACFT (TAILDRAGGER) LAND RWY 30. WINDS GREATLY IN EXCESS OF ATIS WINDS. XWIND TOO STRONG TO ALIGN ACFT WITH RWY CENTERLINE, EVEN AT CRUISE AIRSPD. DID NOT T/D. AN ATTEMPTED LNDG AS CLRED WOULD HAVE BEEN UNSAFE. ON GO AROUND, INFORMED TWR OF INTENTIONS TO LNDG ON PARALLEL TXWY 35, AND WOULD ACCEPT OWN RISK. TWR CAME BACK WITH 'UNDERSTAND DECLARING AN EMER.' MADE CLR TO TWR THERE WAS NO EMER, AND REPEATED INTENTIONS. TWR SEEMED CONFUSED, THEN SAID, 'I CAN'T CLR YOU TO LAND ON TXWY.' THIS WAS ACKNOWLEDGED, AND AGAIN PLT INFORMED TWR THAT PLT WOULD ACCEPT OWN RISK. TWR THEN SAID, 'EXERCISE CAUTION, LAND AT OWN RISK.' LNDG ACCOMPLISHED W/O INCIDENT. WHILE STOPPED ON RAMP ASI INDICATED WIND OVER 40 KTS VS OF ACFT 51 KTS. THIS LACK OF FAMILIARITY WITH SAFE ALTERNATIVES BY THE TWR COULD VERY EASILY HAVE RESULTED IN IMPLICITLY ENCOURAGING THE PLT TO MAKE A REPEAT LNDG ATTEMPT ON RWY 30, WHICH WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY ENDED IN AN ACCIDENT. THE TWR SUPVR WAS EVEN MORE CONFUSED AND LESS FAMILIAR WITH ALTERNATE SAFE PROCS. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS CONFUSION OFTEN RESULTS IN BUREAUCRATIC PAPERWORK, WHICH ONLY SERVES TO DISCOURAGE FURTHER THE APPROPRIATE USE OF SAFE ALTERNATIVES. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: PLT PREVIOUSLY INFORMED BY A TWR CTLR OF 'ACCEPT OWN RISK' PROCS AVAILABLE ON REQUEST ONLY TO DEVIATE FROM STANDARD PROCS. HAS USED BEFORE WITH NO PROB. HOWEVER, HE ADMITTED THAT HE NOW WISHES HE HAD SIMPLY GONE TO AN ALT ARPT.

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