Narrative:

Due to a disabled cargo jet (flat tire), approximately 7800' from the end of runway 05, the runway was closed. I had been told by a controller once, that a pilot could request, and receive permission to depart on a closed runway. Prior to our engine start time (approximately 30 min prior), I phoned fwa tower to confirm that I could in fact depart on runway 05 if I would do so at my own risk. They confirmed that was correct, and I did request, and received permission to do so upon my departure. I also requested a back taxi down the runway to assure myself there was no debris from the flat tire on the cargo plane. Since I had already gotten information about the cargo plane, and knew it had its flat tire while taxiing and not during departure or landing, I felt sure there would be no debris on the runway. However, after a back-taxi inspection I determined the runway 05 was suitable for our departure. From our position on runway 05 we had approximately 6000' of usable runway, and made our departure without incident. I feel that the availability of this type of provision (departure on a closed runway) should be included in either the aim or far part 91, much like the provision for special VFR into a control zone. My controller friend informed me of the existence of such a provision in the controller's handbook, otherwise I would not have been able to take advantage of it.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: REPORTER CITES LEGAL USE OF CLOSED RWY WITH CTLR'S PERMISSION AND COORD.

Narrative: DUE TO A DISABLED CARGO JET (FLAT TIRE), APPROX 7800' FROM THE END OF RWY 05, THE RWY WAS CLOSED. I HAD BEEN TOLD BY A CTLR ONCE, THAT A PLT COULD REQUEST, AND RECEIVE PERMISSION TO DEPART ON A CLOSED RWY. PRIOR TO OUR ENGINE START TIME (APPROX 30 MIN PRIOR), I PHONED FWA TWR TO CONFIRM THAT I COULD IN FACT DEPART ON RWY 05 IF I WOULD DO SO AT MY OWN RISK. THEY CONFIRMED THAT WAS CORRECT, AND I DID REQUEST, AND RECEIVED PERMISSION TO DO SO UPON MY DEP. I ALSO REQUESTED A BACK TAXI DOWN THE RWY TO ASSURE MYSELF THERE WAS NO DEBRIS FROM THE FLAT TIRE ON THE CARGO PLANE. SINCE I HAD ALREADY GOTTEN INFO ABOUT THE CARGO PLANE, AND KNEW IT HAD ITS FLAT TIRE WHILE TAXIING AND NOT DURING DEP OR LNDG, I FELT SURE THERE WOULD BE NO DEBRIS ON THE RWY. HOWEVER, AFTER A BACK-TAXI INSPECTION I DETERMINED THE RWY 05 WAS SUITABLE FOR OUR DEP. FROM OUR POSITION ON RWY 05 WE HAD APPROX 6000' OF USABLE RWY, AND MADE OUR DEP WITHOUT INCIDENT. I FEEL THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF THIS TYPE OF PROVISION (DEP ON A CLOSED RWY) SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN EITHER THE AIM OR FAR PART 91, MUCH LIKE THE PROVISION FOR SPECIAL VFR INTO A CTL ZONE. MY CTLR FRIEND INFORMED ME OF THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A PROVISION IN THE CTLR'S HANDBOOK, OTHERWISE I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT.

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.