PLT OF SMA VFR LANDED ON TAXIWAY AT CDW; NJ; IN LIEU OF RWY.

Narrative

I WAS CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 27; BEHIND AN SMT ON FINAL. AS I TURNED FROM BASE TO FINAL; THE SUN WAS DIRECTLY IN MY EYES; AND I HAD A LOT OF GLARE ON THE WIND SCREEN. BY CHANCE; I WAS LINED UP WITH TAXIWAY N. IT LOOKED LIKE THE RWY; AND DUE TO THE GLARE; I DID NOT PERCEIVE; DUE TO THE SUN; THAT THE LINE DOWN THE MIDDLE WAS YELLOW; NOT WHITE. HAVING DETERMINED THAT TAXIWAY N WAS RWY 27; I PROCEEDED TO LAND. WHEN I TOUCHED DOWN; I NOTICED THAT THE 'RWY' CENTERLINE WAS YELLOW; AND THEN NOTED A RWY ABOUT 100 FT TO MY R. I DID HAVE A DISCUSSION OF THIS INCIDENT WITH THE TETERBORO FSDO; WHO COUNSELED ME ON MY OWN ERROR IN JUDGEMENT FOR LNDG WITHOUT POSITIVELY IDENTING THE RWY. I DO FEEL THAT SOME PRECAUTIONS COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE LCL CTLR IN ORDER TO HELP PREVENT THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT. FIRST; THE TAXI AND RWY LIGHTS COULD BE TURNED ON AT SUNSET. BLUE LIGHTS ALONG THE SIDES OF TAXIWAY N COULD HAVE SHAKEN MY ERRONEOUS IDENT OF THE RWY. MORE IMPORTANTLY; RWY 27 SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE ACTIVE RWY; WHEN RWY 22 WAS AVAILABLE; AND THE WIND WAS LIGHT. I HAD ALREADY TOLD TWR OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE SUN BEING ON THE HORIZON AS I APCHED THE ARPT. MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WHEN THE SUN IS RISING OR SETTING OVER A RWY; THAT UNLESS OTHER FACTORS STRONGLY DICTATE OTHERWISE; ANOTHER RWY BE MADE ACTIVE. FURTHER; PLTS MIGHT BE WARNED ABOUT THE HAZARD; AND OFFERED AN ALTERNATE RWY. THE DEFINITION OF WHEN SUCH A CONDITION IS OCCURRING COULD BE DETERMINED BY SOME EMPIRICAL TESTING OF WHEN THE SUN BEING WITHIN SO MANY DEGS L OR R OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE RWY AND SO MANY DEGS ABOVE THE HORIZON; PLT VISIBILITY IS COMPROMISED. GIVEN EMPIRICAL PARAMETERS; AN ASTRONOMER; WITH A COMPUTER; COULD DETERMINE FOR EACH CTLED ARPT; WHICH RWYS ARE EFFECTED; AND AT WHAT TIME ON EACH DAY. LCL CTLR COULD THEN KNOW AT WHAT TIMES; AND ON WHICH RWYS THAT SUN GLARE IS A SAFETY FACTOR; AND ACT ACCORDINGLY.