Dlh approach controller querried flight crew who give them permission to land and depart hib airport...

Attributes
ACN	166219
Time
Date	199012
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : hib
State Reference	MN
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 3400 flight time type : 1400
ASRS Report	166219
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	incursion : landing without clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Accused of landing at a closed airport after PNF (also PIC) had talked on the radio with the airport manager. Duluth approach advises us that the hib airport is closed. PIC talks to airport manager on radio #2 I had #2 off.I was monitoring #1 with approach. PIC advises me and approach, airport manager has opened the airport. We land at hib uneventfully about xx:00 pm. At xy:15 pm we get clearance for mps and taxi out. Plows say to us on unicom they will be out of our way. At xy:25 pm we takeoff and are queried by duluth as to who gave us permission to land and takeoff. We answered the airport manager. Perceptions judgement. Our perception was that when the airport manager opened the airport for us on the radio was then that the airport was open! I'm not sure how the airport manager can still perceive that it is closed after opening it over the radio on our company frequency. We based our decision to land on this information. Corrective actions. If our perception of the situation is wrong then I feel what ever penalty is appropriate for us. I feel strongly that if the airport manager is playing games with NOTAMS with duluth and verbal openings of the airport perhaps a review of his actions would be appropriate.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DLH APCH CTLR QUERRIED FLC WHO GIVE THEM PERMISSION TO LAND AND DEPART HIB ARPT WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE CLOSED.

Narrative: ACCUSED OF LNDG AT A CLOSED ARPT AFTER PNF (ALSO PIC) HAD TALKED ON THE RADIO WITH THE ARPT MGR. DULUTH APCH ADVISES US THAT THE HIB ARPT IS CLOSED. PIC TALKS TO ARPT MGR ON RADIO #2 I HAD #2 OFF.I WAS MONITORING #1 WITH APCH. PIC ADVISES ME AND APCH, ARPT MGR HAS OPENED THE ARPT. WE LAND AT HIB UNEVENTFULLY ABOUT XX:00 PM. AT XY:15 PM WE GET CLRNC FOR MPS AND TAXI OUT. PLOWS SAY TO US ON UNICOM THEY WILL BE OUT OF OUR WAY. AT XY:25 PM WE TKOF AND ARE QUERIED BY DULUTH AS TO WHO GAVE US PERMISSION TO LAND AND TKOF. WE ANSWERED THE ARPT MGR. PERCEPTIONS JUDGEMENT. OUR PERCEPTION WAS THAT WHEN THE ARPT MGR OPENED THE ARPT FOR US ON THE RADIO WAS THEN THAT THE ARPT WAS OPEN! I'M NOT SURE HOW THE ARPT MGR CAN STILL PERCEIVE THAT IT IS CLOSED AFTER OPENING IT OVER THE RADIO ON OUR COMPANY FREQ. WE BASED OUR DECISION TO LAND ON THIS INFO. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS. IF OUR PERCEPTION OF THE SITUATION IS WRONG THEN I FEEL WHAT EVER PENALTY IS APPROPRIATE FOR US. I FEEL STRONGLY THAT IF THE ARPT MGR IS PLAYING GAMES WITH NOTAMS WITH DULUTH AND VERBAL OPENINGS OF THE ARPT PERHAPS A REVIEW OF HIS ACTIONS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

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

Dlh approach controller querried flight crew who give them permission to land and depart hib airport which was supposed to be closed.