Narrative:

Airfield conditions: several inches of snow on ground. Packed snow on various portions of runway. Snow on side of runway. Fair braking on landing. Bad news at the 180 degree turnaround point. Received clearance to taxi down the active runway for departure. Captain was given the option of turning off the runway and turning back on, or doing a 180 degree turning prior to takeoff roll. Approaching the turnoff pint, the taxiway was examined and a decision was made to do a 180 degree turn in position. At the departure point, a 180 degree turn was initiated. During the last 45 degrees of turn to the left, the airplane started to skid toward the end of the runway. Brakes were applied to stop all aircraft movement. At this point, the nose was starting to dig into a snow bank, close to the runway edge, possibly off the edge, and very near the runway end lights. After the aircraft was stopped, forward thrust was once again applied. The aircraft continued to drift toward the end of the runway. Reverse thrust was then applied. Indications were that the nose wheel was cocked full left. Thrust was removed, then once again applied in reverse. The plane moved backward uneventfully. Although there was a 'mold' where the nose gear started to dig into the snow bank at the side/end of the runway, the snow did not appear to be wet or packed. The top of the snow drift immediately started to full back into the mode our nose gear made. The problem is that we are still unsure where the runway ended, whether the aircraft hit a runway (side) end identifier light(south), whether the light on the runway's side are on the runway or in the grass. The whole procedure of assessing the situation and taking corrective action was only a couple of mins. Our company's operations manual indicates that a report should be made if an aircraft skids off any runway/taxiway or if it strikes runway lights/taxiway lights. We are unsure as to whether we did either. Does the nose gear being off the runway in its absolute interpretation mean we skidded off the runway? Was our nose gear off the runway surface? Did we hit a light? Since runway and taxiway lights tend to vary in displacement (from paved surfaces) we are unsure. As the day and night of wondering continue, we were relieved when we landed in bos and were instructed to taxi into snow piles as deep as what the roc affair entailed. Given the same set of variables, I think the only thing I absolutely could have done different was to have avoided the 180 degree turn. Having committed myself, I became a victim of circumstance once the aircraft started to skid off the runway. Once the aircraft started drifting to the edge of the runway, I was a bit in the hands of fate.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FLT CREW PERFORMING 180 DEGREE TURN AT END OF RWY PRIOR TO TKOF HAS NOSE WHEEL SKID OFF THE RWY INTO A SNOW BANK.

Narrative: AIRFIELD CONDITIONS: SEVERAL INCHES OF SNOW ON GND. PACKED SNOW ON VARIOUS PORTIONS OF RWY. SNOW ON SIDE OF RWY. FAIR BRAKING ON LNDG. BAD NEWS AT THE 180 DEG TURNAROUND POINT. RECEIVED CLRNC TO TAXI DOWN THE ACTIVE RWY FOR DEP. CAPT WAS GIVEN THE OPTION OF TURNING OFF THE RWY AND TURNING BACK ON, OR DOING A 180 DEG TURNING PRIOR TO TKOF ROLL. APCHING THE TURNOFF PINT, THE TXWY WAS EXAMINED AND A DECISION WAS MADE TO DO A 180 DEG TURN IN POS. AT THE DEP POINT, A 180 DEG TURN WAS INITIATED. DURING THE LAST 45 DEGS OF TURN TO THE LEFT, THE AIRPLANE STARTED TO SKID TOWARD THE END OF THE RWY. BRAKES WERE APPLIED TO STOP ALL ACFT MOVEMENT. AT THIS POINT, THE NOSE WAS STARTING TO DIG INTO A SNOW BANK, CLOSE TO THE RWY EDGE, POSSIBLY OFF THE EDGE, AND VERY NEAR THE RWY END LIGHTS. AFTER THE ACFT WAS STOPPED, FORWARD THRUST WAS ONCE AGAIN APPLIED. THE ACFT CONTINUED TO DRIFT TOWARD THE END OF THE RWY. REVERSE THRUST WAS THEN APPLIED. INDICATIONS WERE THAT THE NOSE WHEEL WAS COCKED FULL LEFT. THRUST WAS REMOVED, THEN ONCE AGAIN APPLIED IN REVERSE. THE PLANE MOVED BACKWARD UNEVENTFULLY. ALTHOUGH THERE WAS A 'MOLD' WHERE THE NOSE GEAR STARTED TO DIG INTO THE SNOW BANK AT THE SIDE/END OF THE RWY, THE SNOW DID NOT APPEAR TO BE WET OR PACKED. THE TOP OF THE SNOW DRIFT IMMEDIATELY STARTED TO FULL BACK INTO THE MODE OUR NOSE GEAR MADE. THE PROB IS THAT WE ARE STILL UNSURE WHERE THE RWY ENDED, WHETHER THE ACFT HIT A RWY (SIDE) END IDENTIFIER LIGHT(S), WHETHER THE LIGHT ON THE RWY'S SIDE ARE ON THE RWY OR IN THE GRASS. THE WHOLE PROC OF ASSESSING THE SITUATION AND TAKING CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS ONLY A COUPLE OF MINS. OUR COMPANY'S OPS MANUAL INDICATES THAT A RPT SHOULD BE MADE IF AN ACFT SKIDS OFF ANY RWY/TXWY OR IF IT STRIKES RWY LIGHTS/TXWY LIGHTS. WE ARE UNSURE AS TO WHETHER WE DID EITHER. DOES THE NOSE GEAR BEING OFF THE RWY IN ITS ABSOLUTE INTERP MEAN WE SKIDDED OFF THE RWY? WAS OUR NOSE GEAR OFF THE RWY SURFACE? DID WE HIT A LIGHT? SINCE RWY AND TXWY LIGHTS TEND TO VARY IN DISPLACEMENT (FROM PAVED SURFACES) WE ARE UNSURE. AS THE DAY AND NIGHT OF WONDERING CONTINUE, WE WERE RELIEVED WHEN WE LANDED IN BOS AND WERE INSTRUCTED TO TAXI INTO SNOW PILES AS DEEP AS WHAT THE ROC AFFAIR ENTAILED. GIVEN THE SAME SET OF VARIABLES, I THINK THE ONLY THING I ABSOLUTELY COULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENT WAS TO HAVE AVOIDED THE 180 DEG TURN. HAVING COMMITTED MYSELF, I BECAME A VICTIM OF CIRCUMSTANCE ONCE THE ACFT STARTED TO SKID OFF THE RWY. ONCE THE ACFT STARTED DRIFTING TO THE EDGE OF THE RWY, I WAS A BIT IN THE HANDS OF FATE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.