Narrative:

We went into ind and set up for an approach to runway 23R. First officer's leg. After touchdown, we rolled out past taxiway A7 and I continued down the runway expecting to exit at A11 or A12. Much construction going on south of the runway. We slowly taxied past the displaced threshold for runway 5L for turnoff at the end. Both exits at the end were closed. I set up for a 180 degree on the runway and tower directed me to stop till airport authority came out to marshall us. Reason being that this was not the first time this had happened, and last time a B747 was the offending aircraft, barricades were blown over, etc. We waited for marshallers, safely completed turn and uneventfully went to the gate. My concern is with the way the information is presented to pilots. ATC at ind is not getting us to make the connection that the last 2000 ft of runway 23R is not usable, even for turnaround/backtaxi. ATIS had runway 23L/right as active yet NOTAM addressed runway 5L threshold. Same with NOTAMS on flight plan. Obviously, I should have made the connection. But let's not make this more confusing than it needs to be. I am not the first nor will I be the last to make this error, in my opinion due to poor wording on ATIS/NOTAMS. What would have helped would have been words to the effect that if runway 23R is active then ATIS should state quote last 2000 ft runway 23R closed, not useable for taxi, taxiway A11-A12 closed, men, equipment etc. Unquote. I think you can see where I'm going with this. I for one was unaware/unsure of the usability of runway after a relocated threshold vice a displaced threshold. What I'm asking is for the folks at ind to be more specific with this information, especially when the NOTAM is not for the runway that is active. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the information from the ATIS and the information his dispatcher put on the flight plan were all that were available to him. He assumed the taxiway at the end of the runway was open, even though there was a displaced threshold due to construction. He was unaware of the requirement by the airport authority to have someone guide him around at the end of the runway in order to taxi back. Additionally, the tower never mentioned the requirements for runway 23R. He felt that too many assumptions were made.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80 FLT CREW MISUNDERSTANDS THE ATIS INFO DURING APP/LNDG AT IND.

Narrative: WE WENT INTO IND AND SET UP FOR AN APCH TO RWY 23R. FO'S LEG. AFTER TOUCHDOWN, WE ROLLED OUT PAST TXWY A7 AND I CONTINUED DOWN THE RWY EXPECTING TO EXIT AT A11 OR A12. MUCH CONSTRUCTION GOING ON S OF THE RWY. WE SLOWLY TAXIED PAST THE DISPLACED THRESHOLD FOR RWY 5L FOR TURNOFF AT THE END. BOTH EXITS AT THE END WERE CLOSED. I SET UP FOR A 180 DEG ON THE RWY AND TWR DIRECTED ME TO STOP TILL ARPT AUTHORITY CAME OUT TO MARSHALL US. REASON BEING THAT THIS WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAD HAPPENED, AND LAST TIME A B747 WAS THE OFFENDING ACFT, BARRICADES WERE BLOWN OVER, ETC. WE WAITED FOR MARSHALLERS, SAFELY COMPLETED TURN AND UNEVENTFULLY WENT TO THE GATE. MY CONCERN IS WITH THE WAY THE INFO IS PRESENTED TO PLTS. ATC AT IND IS NOT GETTING US TO MAKE THE CONNECTION THAT THE LAST 2000 FT OF RWY 23R IS NOT USABLE, EVEN FOR TURNAROUND/BACKTAXI. ATIS HAD RWY 23L/R AS ACTIVE YET NOTAM ADDRESSED RWY 5L THRESHOLD. SAME WITH NOTAMS ON FLT PLAN. OBVIOUSLY, I SHOULD HAVE MADE THE CONNECTION. BUT LET'S NOT MAKE THIS MORE CONFUSING THAN IT NEEDS TO BE. I AM NOT THE FIRST NOR WILL I BE THE LAST TO MAKE THIS ERROR, IN MY OPINION DUE TO POOR WORDING ON ATIS/NOTAMS. WHAT WOULD HAVE HELPED WOULD HAVE BEEN WORDS TO THE EFFECT THAT IF RWY 23R IS ACTIVE THEN ATIS SHOULD STATE QUOTE LAST 2000 FT RWY 23R CLOSED, NOT USEABLE FOR TAXI, TXWY A11-A12 CLOSED, MEN, EQUIP ETC. UNQUOTE. I THINK YOU CAN SEE WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS. I FOR ONE WAS UNAWARE/UNSURE OF THE USABILITY OF RWY AFTER A RELOCATED THRESHOLD VICE A DISPLACED THRESHOLD. WHAT I'M ASKING IS FOR THE FOLKS AT IND TO BE MORE SPECIFIC WITH THIS INFO, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE NOTAM IS NOT FOR THE RWY THAT IS ACTIVE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE INFO FROM THE ATIS AND THE INFO HIS DISPATCHER PUT ON THE FLT PLAN WERE ALL THAT WERE AVAILABLE TO HIM. HE ASSUMED THE TXWY AT THE END OF THE RWY WAS OPEN, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A DISPLACED THRESHOLD DUE TO CONSTRUCTION. HE WAS UNAWARE OF THE REQUIREMENT BY THE ARPT AUTHORITY TO HAVE SOMEONE GUIDE HIM AROUND AT THE END OF THE RWY IN ORDER TO TAXI BACK. ADDITIONALLY, THE TWR NEVER MENTIONED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR RWY 23R. HE FELT THAT TOO MANY ASSUMPTIONS WERE MADE.

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.