A McDonnell Douglas DC-9-33RC cargo plane was substantially damaged in a landing accident at Saltillo Airport, Mexico. The airplane originated in Managua, Nicaragua and operated on a non-scheduled cargo flight to Saltillo via Tapachula, Mexico. The flight landed at Tapachula at 00:25 hours local time. An IFR flight plan was then filed for Saltillo, with Monterrey as alternate. It was not taken into account though, that Monterrey’s main runway was closed that night as per Notam. The flight departed Tapachula at 01:40. The flight was uneventful up to the approach. The aircraft carried out an ILS/DME approach to runway 17. At 04:05 the flight was cleared to land by the controller. One minute later the pilot reported going around. He stated that they would divert to their alternate, Monterrey Airport. At 04:15 the pilot again contacted the controller at Saltillo, reporting that Monterrey Airport was closed and requesting another approach to runway 17. He radioed: “We saw runway but ehhh let’s do a rough minimum approach or below the minimums”. The airplane continued the approach until it touched down to the right of the centreline and on the last third of the runway. It rolled off the side and the nose gear collapsed. Probable Cause: “Continuing the precision approach (ILS CAT 1) in conditions of reduced visibility by fog (no visual contact with the runway at an airport below minimums), which resulted in an abrupt landing and misaligned to the right on the last third of the runway, during a second landing attempt, the Commission also determined that what caused the continuation of the landing was the lack of fuel to fly to a second alternate airport not contemplated in the operation”. Contributing factors: 1. Lack of analysis of pre-flight operational information (current NOTAMs, METAR, forecasts, fuel to second alternate airport and flight tracking) 2. Unstabilized approach 3. Lack of application of CRM concepts 4. Lack of adherence to procedure – operations, of providing METAR and NOTAM to the crew for the dispatch of the aircraft. 5. Lack of adherence to the procedure for flight control and tracking 6. Lack of procedures to establish two alternate airports when the destination airport is below minimums. 7. Lack of Company supervision, operation and maintenance surveillance of aircraft flight recorders.