Narrative:

On approach to akn airport at night, akn approach cleared us for the visual runway 11. About 10 mi out we were switched to akn tower. Local time was XA59PM. After the captain checked in with tower, they replied that they were closing in 1 min, gave their standard 'the tower is closing' dialogue, and told us to contact ena radio on CTAF frequency for advisories. Now we were about 6 mi west for the straight in to runway 11. Ena radio didn't respond, so we announced our position and intentions. An small transport reported southeast and said he'd enter a left downwind for runway 11. We had him in sight and determined he'd be no conflict. About 3 mi on final, the captain spotted a red rotating beacon aligned with runway centerline but it was hard to tell exactly where this 'unannounced' aircraft was, east or west of the airport. The captain told me to be ready for a go around and again announced our position and intentions on CTAF. At about the same time we figured out that the unidented aircraft was on approach to runway 29, the aircraft broke off his approach to the north. We landed on runway 11 uneventfully. On rollout we heard the unidented aircraft, an small aircraft, report overhead for the downwind runway 29. The captain talked with the small aircraft pilot in person and told him we'd appreciate him using the CTAF in the future. He told the captain that akn tower had cleared him to land on runway 29 before they closed. We were still with akn approach control when we checked in with them right before they closed. The winds were northwest at 4 KTS so either runway could have been in use. I think akn tower should have issued a known TA as part of their closing dialogue. That way, we would have known about the small aircraft's approach to runway 29. Akn approach was not aware of the small aircraft either. I don't recall ena radio saying anything on CTAF until after we had landed and asked them to close our flight plan. Even with excellent visibility, it was very difficult to determine visually where the small aircraft was in relation to the airport. Initially, we reasoned that, if it was on approach to runway 29, we'd see its landing light. Evidently, the landing light was burned out or turned off. If the visibility had not been as good, a potentially dangerous event could have happened. I think this situation could have been averted if the tower simply had given a known TA before closing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MLG FOUND ITSELF NOSE TO NOSE WITH AN SMA ON LNDG APCH.

Narrative: ON APCH TO AKN ARPT AT NIGHT, AKN APCH CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL RWY 11. ABOUT 10 MI OUT WE WERE SWITCHED TO AKN TWR. LCL TIME WAS XA59PM. AFTER THE CAPT CHKED IN WITH TWR, THEY REPLIED THAT THEY WERE CLOSING IN 1 MIN, GAVE THEIR STANDARD 'THE TWR IS CLOSING' DIALOGUE, AND TOLD US TO CONTACT ENA RADIO ON CTAF FREQ FOR ADVISORIES. NOW WE WERE ABOUT 6 MI W FOR THE STRAIGHT IN TO RWY 11. ENA RADIO DIDN'T RESPOND, SO WE ANNOUNCED OUR POS AND INTENTIONS. AN SMT RPTED SE AND SAID HE'D ENTER A L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 11. WE HAD HIM IN SIGHT AND DETERMINED HE'D BE NO CONFLICT. ABOUT 3 MI ON FINAL, THE CAPT SPOTTED A RED ROTATING BEACON ALIGNED WITH RWY CTRLINE BUT IT WAS HARD TO TELL EXACTLY WHERE THIS 'UNANNOUNCED' ACFT WAS, E OR W OF THE ARPT. THE CAPT TOLD ME TO BE READY FOR A GAR AND AGAIN ANNOUNCED OUR POS AND INTENTIONS ON CTAF. AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME WE FIGURED OUT THAT THE UNIDENTED ACFT WAS ON APCH TO RWY 29, THE ACFT BROKE OFF HIS APCH TO THE N. WE LANDED ON RWY 11 UNEVENTFULLY. ON ROLLOUT WE HEARD THE UNIDENTED ACFT, AN SMA, RPT OVERHEAD FOR THE DOWNWIND RWY 29. THE CAPT TALKED WITH THE SMA PLT IN PERSON AND TOLD HIM WE'D APPRECIATE HIM USING THE CTAF IN THE FUTURE. HE TOLD THE CAPT THAT AKN TWR HAD CLRED HIM TO LAND ON RWY 29 BEFORE THEY CLOSED. WE WERE STILL WITH AKN APCH CTL WHEN WE CHKED IN WITH THEM RIGHT BEFORE THEY CLOSED. THE WINDS WERE NW AT 4 KTS SO EITHER RWY COULD HAVE BEEN IN USE. I THINK AKN TWR SHOULD HAVE ISSUED A KNOWN TA AS PART OF THEIR CLOSING DIALOGUE. THAT WAY, WE WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE SMA'S APCH TO RWY 29. AKN APCH WAS NOT AWARE OF THE SMA EITHER. I DON'T RECALL ENA RADIO SAYING ANYTHING ON CTAF UNTIL AFTER WE HAD LANDED AND ASKED THEM TO CLOSE OUR FLT PLAN. EVEN WITH EXCELLENT VISIBILITY, IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE VISUALLY WHERE THE SMA WAS IN RELATION TO THE ARPT. INITIALLY, WE REASONED THAT, IF IT WAS ON APCH TO RWY 29, WE'D SEE ITS LNDG LIGHT. EVIDENTLY, THE LNDG LIGHT WAS BURNED OUT OR TURNED OFF. IF THE VISIBILITY HAD NOT BEEN AS GOOD, A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS EVENT COULD HAVE HAPPENED. I THINK THIS SIT COULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED IF THE TWR SIMPLY HAD GIVEN A KNOWN TA BEFORE CLOSING.

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.