Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 75; Flight Crew Total 6000; Flight Crew Type 1000
Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Incursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Chart Or Publication; Airport; Procedure
During pre-flight preparation for the planned flight I noticed a large number of NOTAMS; but did not realize that [the runway] had a significant portion of it closed; as opposed to having an extended threshold. On arrival into my destination I was being vectored for a visual approach to [the runway]; turning approximately a 4.5 mile final. I saw the airport environment but it took me a little longer to pick up [the runway]; which looked normal to me as I continued the approach to the approach end of [the runway]; however I did notice some equipment off to the side of the runway. I do not recall seeing barricades or any other markings on the runway indicating a closed runway or an extended threshold; nor did I see any flashing lights or other non-standard markings. My recollection is that I touched down close to the approach end of [the runway]; and as I was rolling out I saw that appeared to be a mound of dirt crossing the runway. The mound was too close for me to execute a go around as I was already decelerating the aircraft. As I crossed the mound of dirt the aircraft became slightly airborne; therefore I applied back pressure on the yoke. The aircraft settled on the runway normally. As I was rolling out I finally saw some barricades and realized that something was not right. I reported the problem to the tower; and was provided a phone number to call which I did. It took approximately 20 to 40 minutes to arrange for the movement of the barricades; and to relocate the aircraft safely. I call and provided the controller with all information he requested. Early afternoon I was told that the FAA was trying to get in touch with me. I had additional conversations with a FAA representative who stated he examined aircraft and did not observe any damage. Cessna recommended a hard landing or overweight inspection based upon what transpired during the landing. I called Cessna and ask them to fax me the procedure for hard landing; which was sent to the FBO; who completed the recommended inspection and found nothing wrong. I called back and informed him that I had the check done and no damage was found. There was no damage to the aircraft; to me; or any other persons.Additional Observations:1.  The NOTAM about [the runway] was approximately number 8 out of a least a dozen NOTAMS for that airport that day; stating the north 5025 of [the runway] was 'closed'. I would have thought the proper terminology would have been displaced threshold and would have been a more prominent part of the list.2. If [the runway] was barricaded or had an extended threshold it was not obvious to me during the approach and I do not recall seeing any such markings prior to landing.3.  I received no communication from the tower indicating I was approaching part of [the runway] that was closed; nor did I receive any low altitude warnings.4.  I do not recall the tower controller mentioning anything about the abnormal condition of the runway.5.  Reviewing in-flight data available through various sources of pre-flight information would make a significant NOTAM of this type more easily perceived by the pilot; and make it less likely to be overlooked or misinterpreted.
A C-525 pilot landed on a closed runway portion because he did not see the NOTAM referencing the closed runway section. Upon arrival there were no runway barricades or closed runway indications.