|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : rdu|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Controlling Facilities||artcc : zma|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng|
|Navigation In Use||Other|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : private|
pilot : instrument
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 30|
flight time total : 2500
flight time type : 1600
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : ground|
|Qualification||controller : non radar|
|Anomaly||other anomaly other|
|Independent Detector||aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified|
other flight crewa
|Resolutory Action||none taken : insufficient time|
|Consequence||faa : reviewed incident with flight crew|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
|Airport||other physical facility|
On jun/mon/92 at approximately X45-Y00 pm, VFR conditions with a ceiling of approximately 4500 ft, small aircraft called raleigh approach control 30-40 mi out, with the ATIS, for landing instructions. Raleigh approach advised us to plan for runway 32. Because of its short length (3700 ft) and a no wind condition, we asked for a longer runway -- we were given 5R. Approximately 10 min later, raleigh approach switched us to runway 32 again. On final approach, we could see the entire length of the concrete of runway 32, and planned the landing accordingly. Because of the no wind condition, we landed long and after pumping the brakes to slow down -- coasted down to the end. About 2/3 the way down the runway -- several hundred ft before the end of the concrete, appears a low yellow plastic row of short tubes in a single row crossing the runway. Except there was an open space about a vehicle wide in the middle. The plane was further braked and coasted to a stop part-way through the opening. The plane did not touch the poles. The tower then instructed me to proceed to taxi to the FBO (by ground control). Tower asked me to telephone -- which was done. After explaining to mr X of FAA -- he said he was satisfied. Tower also sent someone to inspect airplane and he noted no damage. Advised me to telephone tower again. Again, I called mr X of FAA who again said he was satisfied. Suggestion: having never seen a yellow pole line before, approach plates could indicate and tower could remind landing pilots. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states he is not sure why the tubes are placed to cut off several hundred ft of runway and no notification of such anywhere. He flies a fast aircraft and usually requests and receives landing on runway 5. Encountering the poles was a total shock. Reporter feels something else should be developed to solve this problem of preventing traffic from crossing runway 5R. One suggestion is to end the runway and not continue a taxiway across the intersecting runway. Signs to warn pilots. Great yellow stripes to end the runway. And since most pilots speak english, a mention on the ATIS. Certainly some chart indication or all of the above instead of poles unannounced. Reporter aircraft is midwing and able to taxi over the row without damage. Low wing might not have been so lucky.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SMT ON ROLL OUT ENCOUNTERS YELLOW PLASTIC POLES ACROSS RWY. STOPS WITH ACFT NOSE INTO OPENING IN CTR.
Narrative: ON JUN/MON/92 AT APPROX X45-Y00 PM, VFR CONDITIONS WITH A CEILING OF APPROX 4500 FT, SMA CALLED RALEIGH APCH CTL 30-40 MI OUT, WITH THE ATIS, FOR LNDG INSTRUCTIONS. RALEIGH APCH ADVISED US TO PLAN FOR RWY 32. BECAUSE OF ITS SHORT LENGTH (3700 FT) AND A NO WIND CONDITION, WE ASKED FOR A LONGER RWY -- WE WERE GIVEN 5R. APPROX 10 MIN LATER, RALEIGH APCH SWITCHED US TO RWY 32 AGAIN. ON FINAL APCH, WE COULD SEE THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE CONCRETE OF RWY 32, AND PLANNED THE LNDG ACCORDINGLY. BECAUSE OF THE NO WIND CONDITION, WE LANDED LONG AND AFTER PUMPING THE BRAKES TO SLOW DOWN -- COASTED DOWN TO THE END. ABOUT 2/3 THE WAY DOWN THE RWY -- SEVERAL HUNDRED FT BEFORE THE END OF THE CONCRETE, APPEARS A LOW YELLOW PLASTIC ROW OF SHORT TUBES IN A SINGLE ROW XING THE RWY. EXCEPT THERE WAS AN OPEN SPACE ABOUT A VEHICLE WIDE IN THE MIDDLE. THE PLANE WAS FURTHER BRAKED AND COASTED TO A STOP PART-WAY THROUGH THE OPENING. THE PLANE DID NOT TOUCH THE POLES. THE TWR THEN INSTRUCTED ME TO PROCEED TO TAXI TO THE FBO (BY GND CTL). TWR ASKED ME TO TELEPHONE -- WHICH WAS DONE. AFTER EXPLAINING TO MR X OF FAA -- HE SAID HE WAS SATISFIED. TWR ALSO SENT SOMEONE TO INSPECT AIRPLANE AND HE NOTED NO DAMAGE. ADVISED ME TO TELEPHONE TWR AGAIN. AGAIN, I CALLED MR X OF FAA WHO AGAIN SAID HE WAS SATISFIED. SUGGESTION: HAVING NEVER SEEN A YELLOW POLE LINE BEFORE, APCH PLATES COULD INDICATE AND TWR COULD REMIND LNDG PLTS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HE IS NOT SURE WHY THE TUBES ARE PLACED TO CUT OFF SEVERAL HUNDRED FT OF RWY AND NO NOTIFICATION OF SUCH ANYWHERE. HE FLIES A FAST ACFT AND USUALLY REQUESTS AND RECEIVES LNDG ON RWY 5. ENCOUNTERING THE POLES WAS A TOTAL SHOCK. RPTR FEELS SOMETHING ELSE SHOULD BE DEVELOPED TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM OF PREVENTING TFC FROM XING RWY 5R. ONE SUGGESTION IS TO END THE RWY AND NOT CONTINUE A TAXIWAY ACROSS THE INTERSECTING RWY. SIGNS TO WARN PLTS. GREAT YELLOW STRIPES TO END THE RWY. AND SINCE MOST PLTS SPEAK ENGLISH, A MENTION ON THE ATIS. CERTAINLY SOME CHART INDICATION OR ALL OF THE ABOVE INSTEAD OF POLES UNANNOUNCED. RPTR ACFT IS MIDWING AND ABLE TO TAXI OVER THE ROW WITHOUT DAMAGE. LOW WING MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN SO LUCKY.
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.