Narrative:

While being vectored for the visual runway 24 approach at isp by ZNY, the winds were reported as 310 degrees at 18 KTS gusting to 29 KTS. Center asked if we wanted runway 33L for landing. The captain and I agreed the winds favored that runway, so we said we would like the visual runway 33L. Center cleared us for the visual runway 33L and then handed us off to long island tower, who cleared us for the visual runway 33L. They also advised us that an airbus reported a +10 KT windshear on final to runway 33L. I asked the captain to brief the critical items to the visual runway 33L approach, since I was busy flying. When he stated the runway length (5186 ft) I asked should we check the landing performance book (runway analysis). He said that the quick reference landing distance shown on the landing V speed card showed it would be adequate distance. So I continued the approach and landed uneventfully. At the gate, I looked in the landing performance book only to discover runway 33L is not even listed as a usable runway (no performance data given for that runway). In the future, I will not rely on the landing V speed cards required runway lengths, but if doubt exists use the landing performance book (runway analysis).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DURING STRONG GUSTY WINDS, FLC OF A DC9 ACCEPTED RWY FOR LNDG THAT WAS THE MOST FAVORABLE FOR THE WIND DIRECTION. AFTER AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG, THEY FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO ACFT PERFORMANCE DATA LISTED FOR THAT RWY.

Narrative: WHILE BEING VECTORED FOR THE VISUAL RWY 24 APCH AT ISP BY ZNY, THE WINDS WERE RPTED AS 310 DEGS AT 18 KTS GUSTING TO 29 KTS. CTR ASKED IF WE WANTED RWY 33L FOR LNDG. THE CAPT AND I AGREED THE WINDS FAVORED THAT RWY, SO WE SAID WE WOULD LIKE THE VISUAL RWY 33L. CTR CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL RWY 33L AND THEN HANDED US OFF TO LONG ISLAND TWR, WHO CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL RWY 33L. THEY ALSO ADVISED US THAT AN AIRBUS RPTED A +10 KT WINDSHEAR ON FINAL TO RWY 33L. I ASKED THE CAPT TO BRIEF THE CRITICAL ITEMS TO THE VISUAL RWY 33L APCH, SINCE I WAS BUSY FLYING. WHEN HE STATED THE RWY LENGTH (5186 FT) I ASKED SHOULD WE CHK THE LNDG PERFORMANCE BOOK (RWY ANALYSIS). HE SAID THAT THE QUICK REF LNDG DISTANCE SHOWN ON THE LNDG V SPD CARD SHOWED IT WOULD BE ADEQUATE DISTANCE. SO I CONTINUED THE APCH AND LANDED UNEVENTFULLY. AT THE GATE, I LOOKED IN THE LNDG PERFORMANCE BOOK ONLY TO DISCOVER RWY 33L IS NOT EVEN LISTED AS A USABLE RWY (NO PERFORMANCE DATA GIVEN FOR THAT RWY). IN THE FUTURE, I WILL NOT RELY ON THE LNDG V SPD CARDS REQUIRED RWY LENGTHS, BUT IF DOUBT EXISTS USE THE LNDG PERFORMANCE BOOK (RWY ANALYSIS).

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.