A C172 TRAINING FLT LANDS ON THE WRONG RWY; A CLOSED RWY; AT OAK; CA.

Date: 2001-03 · Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172

Anomalies: deviation-track-heading-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-landing-without-clearance|ground-incursion-runway|other-lndg-closed-rwy

Synopsis

A C172 TRAINING FLT LANDS ON THE WRONG RWY; A CLOSED RWY; AT OAK; CA.

Narrative

EVENT PROB: LANDED ON RWY 27R WHEN ASSIGNED RWY 27L. AFTER ALMOST 2 HRS OF TRAINING (AIR WORK AND INST APCHS) WITH AN INSTRUCTOR; I PREPARED TO LAND AT OAK ARPT FROM SAN PABLO BAY ABOUT 25 MI NW. ATIS INFO WAS RECEIVED WITH NUMEROUS NOTAMS INCLUDING TXWY CLOSURES AND RWY 27R CLOSED. BAY APCH ADVISED TO PREPARE FOR R TFC RWY 27L. CLOSER IN; BUT ABOUT 8 MI AWAY; OAK TWR CLRED ME TO LAND RWY 27L WITH R TFC. ON EXTENDED 45 DEG LEG; WAS TOLD TO TURN DOWNWIND (4-5 MI AWAY) FOR DEPARTING TFC AND ADVISED TO LOOK FOR TFC. AFTER DEPARTING; TFC WAS NO LONGER A FACTOR. I RE-ENTERED ON A 45 DEG FOR R TFC. ON DOWNWIND ABEAM THE NUMBERS; THE INSTRUCTOR SIMULATED AN EMER ENG PWR LOSS. AT THAT TIME; I VISUALLY AND MENTALLY FOCUSED ON THE NEAREST RWY (RWY 27R) FOR THE EMER GLIDE DSCNT. IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER THE LNDG DID WE REALIZE THE MISTAKE. IN RETROSPECT; I FEEL A NUMBER OF SUBTLE FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO THE ERROR. I KNEW AND ACKNOWLEDGED RWY 27L AS THE ASSIGNMENT AND I KNEW RWY 27R WAS CLOSED (FROM ATIS). HAVING DONE THE R PATTERN FOR RWY 27R MANY TIMES BEFORE PROBABLY SEDUCED ME INTO THINKING THAT THE 'PICTURE' OR PROC SEEMED NORMAL. THE EARLY CLRNC AND TFC MAY HAVE BEEN A DISTRACTING FACTOR. THE SIMULATED EMER LNDG PROC WAS DEFINITELY DISTRACTING BECAUSE THE EXERCISE CAUSED AN EXTREME FOCUS TO 'GET THE GLIDE DSCNT RIGHT' AND IT CAUSED A HIGHER COCKPIT WORKLOAD. THE EARLIER AIR WORK AND INST APCHS MAY HAVE BEEN FATIGUING ALONG WITH THE ANXIETY OF AN INSTRUCTOR ALONG. FOCUSING ON THE COCKPIT LNDG DUTIES (LNDG CHKLIST) MAY HAVE ADDED A DISTR WITHIN THE PATTERN. POSSIBLE WAYS TO HAVE CAUGHT THE ERROR MIGHT HAVE BEEN TO SPEAK ALOUD: 'CLRED TO LAND RWY 27L' ON SHORT FINAL; ALONG WITH THE GUMPS CHK. CONFIRMING CLRED TO LAND WITH ATC ON FINAL MAY HAVE HELP; BUT PROBABLY IS NOT REALISTIC IN A BUSY RADIO ENVIRONMENT. IT MAY HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE THAT ATC COULD HAVE SPOTTED THE ERROR VISUALLY OR BY RADAR. PERHAPS SIMULATED EMERS SHOULD BE DONE ONLY IN A NORMAL OR STANDARD PATTERN. LASTLY; SPEAK OUT ALOUD; 'THIS IS NOT A NORMAL ENTRY PATTERN' TO EMPHASIZE THE UNUSUAL SIT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 504004: HE DID 2 SHORT FIELD LNDGS. THE PLT PERFORMED GOOD AND WITHOUT ANY PROBS. SO WE DECIDED TO RETURN TO OAK; CHK RIDE. THE PVT PLT DID THE USUAL APCH PROCS BY CONTACTING OAK APCH AND THEN HANDED OFF TO THE TWR. AT THIS POINT I WAS NOT PAYING ANY REAL ATTN TO THE 2-WAY CONVERSATION OR THE FLT -- THE PVT PLT SEEMED VERY CAPABLE. THE PVT PLT CONFIRMED TWICE 'CLRED TO LAND RWY 27L.' FOR YRS WE BOTH HAVE BEEN GOING DOWNWIND FOR RWY 274 -- IT HAD BECOME SO ROUTINE. WHEN WE GOT PERMISSION TO TURN BASE; THERE WAS NO MORE COM AND THERE WAS NO OTHER ACFT ON THE APCH OR TKOF. I MYSELF HAD PAID NO ATTN TO THE TWR'S INSTRUCTION AND NEVER ONCE THOUGHT 'IS IT OK TO LAND ON THIS RWY?' -- AN INSTANCE OF COMPLACENCY -- A CREATURE OF ROUTINE! THE TWR TOLD US OF THE ERROR. PERHAPS SINCE THERE WAS NO EQUIP ON THE RWYS; I UNCONSCIOUSLY THOUGHT THAT RWY 27R WAS OPEN AGAIN. PERHAPS THE TWR COULD HAVE HELPED A LITTLE MORE BY WATCHING APCHING ACFT.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.