Narrative:

While holding over the OM for the ILS runway 14 at aex, approach reported the aex WX 200 ft overcast 1/4 mi visibility. Approach asked what we needed for the approach and we responded with 1/2 mi. Later, approach reported that the visibility was up to 1/2 mi. At the same time, a departing EMB120 reported that he could see 3/4 the way down the runway. We accepted the approach and landed without incident. 60 ft prior to minimums the sequence lights were visually acquired and we landed. Upon arrival at the gate, the first officer and I discussed that the alsf-1 main lights were not on. I contacted the tower to let them know this. They responded that the approach lights were notamed OTS. At that point I realized that we needed 3/4 of a mi visibility for the approach to alexandria. Contributing factors included: no ATIS at alexandria. Neither approach nor tower reported the pertinent approach lights being notamed OTS. Out dispatch release included 4 airports, more than 600 lines of information, only 1 line containing the NOTAM. In summary, I inadvertently overlooked the NOTAM. This resulted in our flight accepting an approach which we shouldn't have accepted. However, I believe that when we arrived at minimums we did have 3/4 mi visibility. I think the controllers, when they have an aircraft going to minimums in WX, should report all pertinent safety information to flcs -- especially when there is no ATIS to report it.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LTT ACR CAPT LANDED WITHOUT HAVING RPTED LNDG MINIMUMS.

Narrative: WHILE HOLDING OVER THE OM FOR THE ILS RWY 14 AT AEX, APCH RPTED THE AEX WX 200 FT OVCST 1/4 MI VISIBILITY. APCH ASKED WHAT WE NEEDED FOR THE APCH AND WE RESPONDED WITH 1/2 MI. LATER, APCH RPTED THAT THE VISIBILITY WAS UP TO 1/2 MI. AT THE SAME TIME, A DEPARTING EMB120 RPTED THAT HE COULD SEE 3/4 THE WAY DOWN THE RWY. WE ACCEPTED THE APCH AND LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. 60 FT PRIOR TO MINIMUMS THE SEQUENCE LIGHTS WERE VISUALLY ACQUIRED AND WE LANDED. UPON ARR AT THE GATE, THE FO AND I DISCUSSED THAT THE ALSF-1 MAIN LIGHTS WERE NOT ON. I CONTACTED THE TWR TO LET THEM KNOW THIS. THEY RESPONDED THAT THE APCH LIGHTS WERE NOTAMED OTS. AT THAT POINT I REALIZED THAT WE NEEDED 3/4 OF A MI VISIBILITY FOR THE APCH TO ALEXANDRIA. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS INCLUDED: NO ATIS AT ALEXANDRIA. NEITHER APCH NOR TWR RPTED THE PERTINENT APCH LIGHTS BEING NOTAMED OTS. OUT DISPATCH RELEASE INCLUDED 4 ARPTS, MORE THAN 600 LINES OF INFO, ONLY 1 LINE CONTAINING THE NOTAM. IN SUMMARY, I INADVERTENTLY OVERLOOKED THE NOTAM. THIS RESULTED IN OUR FLT ACCEPTING AN APCH WHICH WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ACCEPTED. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE ARRIVED AT MINIMUMS WE DID HAVE 3/4 MI VISIBILITY. I THINK THE CTLRS, WHEN THEY HAVE AN ACFT GOING TO MINIMUMS IN WX, SHOULD RPT ALL PERTINENT SAFETY INFO TO FLCS -- ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE IS NO ATIS TO RPT IT.

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.