Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 60; Flight Crew Total 2000; Flight Crew Type 1400
Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport; Human Factors
Actions by Teterboro Airport Operations Personnel; Teterboro Tower and NY TRACON created hazardous approach and landing conditions at Teterboro due to the evident lack of any coordination among the parties. The airport closed Runway 6; turned off the ILS and turned off runway lighting while aircraft were inbound and being instructed by NY Approach to fly the ILS approach. The specific sequence of events in my case was as follows. Obtained Teterboro current ATIS; ILS 6 approach reported in use. I was monitoring Teterboro Tower frequency while communicating with NY TRACON and heard airport Operations Personnel state to the Tower that they wanted to close Runway 6 for undisclosed reasons. Later NY TRACON announced on frequency; 'All aircraft landing Teterboro now expect ILS 6 circle to land Runway 1.' I was vectored heading 090 to intercept the ILS inside VINGS and was cleared for the ILS 6 circle. I advised NY TRACON that I was not receiving I-TEB localizer signal; he responded; 'Yes I am just hearing that now fly heading 060. Let me know if the localizer comes back up they might be putting it back up;' with no other communication as to what ATC's plan was. I now had an instrument approach briefed and set up; was 3 minutes from the airport at 2;000 feet flying a heading with no indication as to what TRACON and Tower expected me to do. At this point in other airspace I would have rejected the approach entirely; however; knowing NY TRACON's frequent belligerence and frankly punitive attitude I knew that this would result in a possible long delay in landing. Trying to salvage the approach I asked the TRACON Controller if I should fly GPS direct to DANDY; cross DANDY at 1;500 feet (knowing that crossing DANDY above 1;500 creates possible less of separation with EWR traffic) and attempt to fly a visual approach from DANDY; to which the Controller responded with something like 'Yes; do that let me know if you get the field.' At DANDY; based on fortunate high familiarity with the airport and its surroundings; I observed that Teterboro had also turned off Runway 6 lights entirely; due to terrain and ground clutter; the airport is almost impossible to see from that location and altitude (Runway 1 lights are not visible due to orientation; terrain and buildings); and I was able to see the beacon only due to my familiarity with the area. I advised the TRACON Controller that I had the airport in sight and was cleared for a visual approach to Runway 1 and landed without incident. I note based on later review that both RNAV/GPS approaches to Runway 6 prohibit night circle to land maneuvers. After landing I queried the Teterboro Tower Controller as to what had happened with the uncoordinated runway closure; disabling of the ILS and decision to shut down lights and the controller responded along the lines of; 'This all just happened like a whirlwind; the runway closed and then they took the glideslope from us.'
IFR arrival to TEB described a very confusing event when the status of the landing runway and the associated ILS was uncertain; the reporter claiming ATC's handling created a hazardous situation.