Narrative:

The construction at kswf caused a NOTAM to be issued which listed the closures based on the distance of the closure. This requires calculation by the user of the usable runway available. This causes error in takeoff and landing computations when errors or confusion occur in this calculation. My crew and myself determined our maximum landing weight by the analysis provided from the co. This analysis was based on a landing length of 7600 ft for runway 9 at kswf. By our operations specifications we rely on the analysis for performance data. After arrival at kswf the runway (9) appeared shorter than the 7600 ft as stated in the analysis. I asked the tower and they told us 6300 ft. This caused me to be slightly overweight on landing as we planned for the 7600 ft length. I notified my co, they realized this and ordered the correct analysis showing runway 9 at 6300 ft for landing. Because of the normal displaced thresholds of 2000 ft for runway 9 and 27 at kswf, when closings occur determining runway legnths, again, is confusing. Especially the way the NOTAMS in this instance are written. Even though the flight was uneventful circumstances of more cargo and or fuel could have ended in an incident. After further discussions with my dispatch, chief pilot and control tower personnel at kswf it can be determined that confusion did exist in trying to determine the actual lengths for runway 9-27. The operations office at kswf is suspect in getting the NOTAMS out timely, though I do not think this is a prime factor in this occurrence. I believe the controling facilities of the airport (tower) did know correct lengths and their input should be tantamount. This should be placed in the NOTAM. When there is runway length closures for construction or whatever, the NOTAM should state the actual length available for takeoff and landing. The issuing agency already knows these figures, and when reporting the information to the FAA/FSS for publication, it doesn't take much time to make this notation in the NOTAM. Ie: runway 9 landing length 6300 ft. Verification becomes much easier and less chances of an error occurring is realized.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: OVERWEIGHT LNDG MADE AT SWF AFTER RELYING ON INCORRECT COMPANY DATA BASED ON A CONFUSING NOTAM ISSUED RELATIVE TO RWY CLOSURE FOR CONSTRUCTION.

Narrative: THE CONSTRUCTION AT KSWF CAUSED A NOTAM TO BE ISSUED WHICH LISTED THE CLOSURES BASED ON THE DISTANCE OF THE CLOSURE. THIS REQUIRES CALCULATION BY THE USER OF THE USABLE RWY AVAILABLE. THIS CAUSES ERROR IN TKOF AND LNDG COMPUTATIONS WHEN ERRORS OR CONFUSION OCCUR IN THIS CALCULATION. MY CREW AND MYSELF DETERMINED OUR MAX LNDG WT BY THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED FROM THE CO. THIS ANALYSIS WAS BASED ON A LNDG LENGTH OF 7600 FT FOR RWY 9 AT KSWF. BY OUR OPS SPECS WE RELY ON THE ANALYSIS FOR PERFORMANCE DATA. AFTER ARR AT KSWF THE RWY (9) APPEARED SHORTER THAN THE 7600 FT AS STATED IN THE ANALYSIS. I ASKED THE TWR AND THEY TOLD US 6300 FT. THIS CAUSED ME TO BE SLIGHTLY OVERWEIGHT ON LNDG AS WE PLANNED FOR THE 7600 FT LENGTH. I NOTIFIED MY CO, THEY REALIZED THIS AND ORDERED THE CORRECT ANALYSIS SHOWING RWY 9 AT 6300 FT FOR LNDG. BECAUSE OF THE NORMAL DISPLACED THRESHOLDS OF 2000 FT FOR RWY 9 AND 27 AT KSWF, WHEN CLOSINGS OCCUR DETERMINING RWY LEGNTHS, AGAIN, IS CONFUSING. ESPECIALLY THE WAY THE NOTAMS IN THIS INSTANCE ARE WRITTEN. EVEN THOUGH THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL CIRCUMSTANCES OF MORE CARGO AND OR FUEL COULD HAVE ENDED IN AN INCIDENT. AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH MY DISPATCH, CHIEF PLT AND CTL TWR PERSONNEL AT KSWF IT CAN BE DETERMINED THAT CONFUSION DID EXIST IN TRYING TO DETERMINE THE ACTUAL LENGTHS FOR RWY 9-27. THE OPS OFFICE AT KSWF IS SUSPECT IN GETTING THE NOTAMS OUT TIMELY, THOUGH I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A PRIME FACTOR IN THIS OCCURRENCE. I BELIEVE THE CTLING FACILITIES OF THE ARPT (TWR) DID KNOW CORRECT LENGTHS AND THEIR INPUT SHOULD BE TANTAMOUNT. THIS SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE NOTAM. WHEN THERE IS RWY LENGTH CLOSURES FOR CONSTRUCTION OR WHATEVER, THE NOTAM SHOULD STATE THE ACTUAL LENGTH AVAILABLE FOR TKOF AND LNDG. THE ISSUING AGENCY ALREADY KNOWS THESE FIGURES, AND WHEN RPTING THE INFO TO THE FAA/FSS FOR PUB, IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TIME TO MAKE THIS NOTATION IN THE NOTAM. IE: RWY 9 LNDG LENGTH 6300 FT. VERIFICATION BECOMES MUCH EASIER AND LESS CHANCES OF AN ERROR OCCURRING IS REALIZED.

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.