Narrative:

In an small aircraft a on an IFR flight plan, we discovered outside the marker that the NDB was unreliable. This may have led to the fact that ATC did not clear us for the approach ILS 36 and hand us off to local frequency until after we were inside the marker. At this point the pilot requested advisory from the unicom operator, got no response, and at about 1 1/2 mi final announced that we were landing on runway 36. We saw no traffic on approach and landed uneventfully. While applying power to taxi clear of the runway we saw an small aircraft B on takeoff roll on runway 18, and quickly taxied off the runway into the grass. When we parked we were approached by a man who identified himself as the FAA accident prevention counselor for oxc. He told us that it is never correct to make a straight in approach at an uncontrolled field because it is necessary to circle to look for traffic. I don't think we would have descended below circling minimums in such a case because the visibility was too low. In any case, the small aircraft B didn't take the runway until after we had landed, so we would not have seen him. The small aircraft B definitely did not make a radio announcement, and he shouldn't have been flying VFR in those conditions. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter had been cleared for the ILS runway 36 approach by nyc ARTCC which at this time was the controling agency for this non tower airport. Unicom did not answer because they were at lunch. This runway is built over a hill, so small aircraft a was probably on flare when small aircraft B took runway at opp end and because of hill in middle of runway would not have been able to see small aircraft a on rollout. FAA accident prevention counselor was not FAA employee but a local who was designated to this job.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC BETWEEN LNDG SMA AND SMA B ON TKOF ROLL FROM OPPOSITE END OF RWY.

Narrative: IN AN SMA A ON AN IFR FLT PLAN, WE DISCOVERED OUTSIDE THE MARKER THAT THE NDB WAS UNRELIABLE. THIS MAY HAVE LED TO THE FACT THAT ATC DID NOT CLEAR US FOR THE APCH ILS 36 AND HAND US OFF TO LCL FREQ UNTIL AFTER WE WERE INSIDE THE MARKER. AT THIS POINT THE PLT REQUESTED ADVISORY FROM THE UNICOM OPERATOR, GOT NO RESPONSE, AND AT ABOUT 1 1/2 MI FINAL ANNOUNCED THAT WE WERE LNDG ON RWY 36. WE SAW NO TFC ON APCH AND LANDED UNEVENTFULLY. WHILE APPLYING PWR TO TAXI CLR OF THE RWY WE SAW AN SMA B ON TKOF ROLL ON RWY 18, AND QUICKLY TAXIED OFF THE RWY INTO THE GRASS. WHEN WE PARKED WE WERE APCHED BY A MAN WHO IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS THE FAA ACCIDENT PREVENTION COUNSELOR FOR OXC. HE TOLD US THAT IT IS NEVER CORRECT TO MAKE A STRAIGHT IN APCH AT AN UNCONTROLLED FIELD BECAUSE IT IS NECESSARY TO CIRCLE TO LOOK FOR TFC. I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE DSNDED BELOW CIRCLING MINIMUMS IN SUCH A CASE BECAUSE THE VIS WAS TOO LOW. IN ANY CASE, THE SMA B DIDN'T TAKE THE RWY UNTIL AFTER WE HAD LANDED, SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN HIM. THE SMA B DEFINITELY DID NOT MAKE A RADIO ANNOUNCEMENT, AND HE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN FLYING VFR IN THOSE CONDITIONS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR HAD BEEN CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 36 APCH BY NYC ARTCC WHICH AT THIS TIME WAS THE CTLING AGENCY FOR THIS NON TWR ARPT. UNICOM DID NOT ANSWER BECAUSE THEY WERE AT LUNCH. THIS RWY IS BUILT OVER A HILL, SO SMA A WAS PROBABLY ON FLARE WHEN SMA B TOOK RWY AT OPP END AND BECAUSE OF HILL IN MIDDLE OF RWY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE SMA A ON ROLLOUT. FAA ACCIDENT PREVENTION COUNSELOR WAS NOT FAA EMPLOYEE BUT A LCL WHO WAS DESIGNATED TO THIS JOB.

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.