Incident Details
On 1 April 2010, at 09:15 UTC, a Cessna 152, registration CS-AYK, operated by Nortávia - Transportes Aéreos, SA, conducted a touch-and-go landing at Ponte de Sor aerodrome. The aircraft had departed from Maia Municipal Aerodrome (Vilar da Luz) with two crew members on board, intending to perform three touch-and-go landings at Ponte de Sor as part of a training flight. The flight plan filed with the ARO at Porto Airport included this maneuver.
Aerodrome Status
Ponte de Sor aerodrome had been closed to air traffic since 17 February 2010, as indicated by multiple NOTAMs issued by the Lisbon International NOTAM Centre (NAV Portugal). The most recent NOTAM, published on 28 March 2010, covered the period from 29 March to 31 May 2010. Visual markings in the form of white "X" patterns were placed at the runway ends and midpoint, in accordance with ICAO Annex 14 requirements.
Flight Execution
Upon arrival at Ponte de Sor, the pilot attempted to contact the aerodrome frequency but received no reply. He then followed standard procedures for an uncontrolled aerodrome, overflew the field to observe the windsock, and elected to land on Runway 02. Despite noticing the white "X" markings at the start of the runway, the pilot interpreted them as indicating a displaced threshold rather than a closed runway. He proceeded with the first touch-and-go.
After the maneuver, a communication on the aerodrome frequency informed the pilot that the aerodrome was closed to all traffic except EMA operations. The pilot instructor then decided to abort further exercises and diverted to Torres Vedras Municipal Aerodrome (Santa Cruz) for refueling, before returning to Vilar da Luz.
Analysis
The investigation noted that the pilot had consulted NOTAMs via the Eurocontrol European AIS Database on the previous day, but this source did not include domestic aerodromes like Ponte de Sor. The flight plan was accepted by ATM services, but a flight plan is a declaration of intent, not an authorization. The visual markings, although compliant with ICAO standards, were misinterpreted by the pilot as a displaced threshold due to their resemblance to markings at other aerodromes familiar to him.
Conclusion
The incident occurred because the pilot misinterpreted the runway closure markings and proceeded with a touch-and-go at a closed aerodrome. No damage or injuries resulted. The investigation did not assign a probable cause.