Narrative:

During a recent landing of our flight at lax, we encountered a situation which exposed some deficiencies in the ATC handling of ground traffic. The problem concerns the ATC holds of aircraft between parallel runways (25 left and right, 24 left and right). The situation our widebody transport aircraft encountered occurred near the end of a landing rollout on runway 25L. As the result of an aircraft holding between runways 25L and 25R on taxiway 45, the captain elected to turn off the runway at the next exit point, taxiway 47. The aircraft on taxiway 45 was widebody transport (standard model), and had landed on runway 25L just previous to us. As our aircraft passed taxiway 45 during the rollout, we noticed his tail was hanging over the runway 25L hold line by 15'-20'. The overhang was not noticeable during the approach, landing, and most of rollout. No evasive action was required. The wingtip clearance was adequate. One additional note, prior to landing the ATC tower requested an aircraft on the field to 'move up'. We later determined after landing the ATC request was made to the aircraft on taxiway 45. We do not believe the widebody transport aircraft made any movement forward. The tower never advised us prior to our landing about an overhang. After the flight I did some research and now believe my estimation of the overhang was underestimated. Distances are somewhat difficult to judge from inside a jumbo jet. The distance between runway 25L and 25R hold lines is 185', and a standard widebody transport length is 231'. It's 570' between runway edges of 25L and 25R. We had also noticed the widebody transport nose was short of the 25R hold line by 20'. Based on this information the overhang may of been as much as 60' to 75'. This would of placed the widebody transport tail at approximately 115' to 130' from 25L runway edge. Runway 25L is 200' wide. In this case the widebody transport was marginally clear of the runway, allowing aircraft utilizing runway 25L to safely pass under normal circumstances. Holding aircraft between the runways a lax is standard procedure. This policy which allows for tail overhangs is contrary to the FAA's airmans information manual. The manual states (paragraph 60-left). 'An aircraft exiting the runway is not clear until all parts of the aircraft have xed the holding line.' it is my belief no aircraft should be held in between runways, even if there is no overhang. Allowing for overhangs severely reduces the margin for safety. For example if an aircraft that is utilizing runway 25L or 25R for takeoff or landing encounters a problem (ie engine failures, loss of steering, hydroplaning, flat tires), and it results in a slight runway excursion toward the holding txwys, the potential for collision with the holding aircraft is great. Addendum: since the completion of this report a similar situation occurred on our flight of august. Our flight was given ATC clearance for takeoff on runway 25R. The captain refused the clearance on account of a widebody transport holding on taxiway 53 in between runway 25L and 25R. The tail of the widebody transport (tail pointed north) was exceptionally close to the runway 25R edge. It is obvious now that ATC is operating under the expendiency of moving traffic and not by what is considered safe operating practice.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WDB HELD BETWEEN RWYS AT LAX LEAVES MINIMAL CLNRC FOR WDB TYPE ACFT ON LNDG ROLLOUT.

Narrative: DURING A RECENT LNDG OF OUR FLT AT LAX, WE ENCOUNTERED A SITUATION WHICH EXPOSED SOME DEFICIENCIES IN THE ATC HANDLING OF GND TFC. THE PROB CONCERNS THE ATC HOLDS OF ACFT BTWN PARALLEL RWYS (25 L AND R, 24 L AND R). THE SITUATION OUR WDB ACFT ENCOUNTERED OCCURRED NEAR THE END OF A LNDG ROLLOUT ON RWY 25L. AS THE RESULT OF AN ACFT HOLDING BTWN RWYS 25L AND 25R ON TXWY 45, THE CAPT ELECTED TO TURN OFF THE RWY AT THE NEXT EXIT POINT, TXWY 47. THE ACFT ON TXWY 45 WAS WDB (STANDARD MODEL), AND HAD LANDED ON RWY 25L JUST PREVIOUS TO US. AS OUR ACFT PASSED TXWY 45 DURING THE ROLLOUT, WE NOTICED HIS TAIL WAS HANGING OVER THE RWY 25L HOLD LINE BY 15'-20'. THE OVERHANG WAS NOT NOTICEABLE DURING THE APCH, LNDG, AND MOST OF ROLLOUT. NO EVASIVE ACTION WAS REQUIRED. THE WINGTIP CLRNC WAS ADEQUATE. ONE ADDITIONAL NOTE, PRIOR TO LNDG THE ATC TWR REQUESTED AN ACFT ON THE FIELD TO 'MOVE UP'. WE LATER DETERMINED AFTER LNDG THE ATC REQUEST WAS MADE TO THE ACFT ON TXWY 45. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE WDB ACFT MADE ANY MOVEMENT FORWARD. THE TWR NEVER ADVISED US PRIOR TO OUR LNDG ABOUT AN OVERHANG. AFTER THE FLT I DID SOME RESEARCH AND NOW BELIEVE MY ESTIMATION OF THE OVERHANG WAS UNDERESTIMATED. DISTANCES ARE SOMEWHAT DIFFICULT TO JUDGE FROM INSIDE A JUMBO JET. THE DISTANCE BTWN RWY 25L AND 25R HOLD LINES IS 185', AND A STANDARD WDB LENGTH IS 231'. IT'S 570' BTWN RWY EDGES OF 25L AND 25R. WE HAD ALSO NOTICED THE WDB NOSE WAS SHORT OF THE 25R HOLD LINE BY 20'. BASED ON THIS INFO THE OVERHANG MAY OF BEEN AS MUCH AS 60' TO 75'. THIS WOULD OF PLACED THE WDB TAIL AT APPROX 115' TO 130' FROM 25L RWY EDGE. RWY 25L IS 200' WIDE. IN THIS CASE THE WDB WAS MARGINALLY CLR OF THE RWY, ALLOWING ACFT UTILIZING RWY 25L TO SAFELY PASS UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. HOLDING ACFT BTWN THE RWYS A LAX IS STANDARD PROC. THIS POLICY WHICH ALLOWS FOR TAIL OVERHANGS IS CONTRARY TO THE FAA'S AIRMANS INFO MANUAL. THE MANUAL STATES (PARAGRAPH 60-L). 'AN ACFT EXITING THE RWY IS NOT CLR UNTIL ALL PARTS OF THE ACFT HAVE XED THE HOLDING LINE.' IT IS MY BELIEF NO ACFT SHOULD BE HELD IN BTWN RWYS, EVEN IF THERE IS NO OVERHANG. ALLOWING FOR OVERHANGS SEVERELY REDUCES THE MARGIN FOR SAFETY. FOR EXAMPLE IF AN ACFT THAT IS UTILIZING RWY 25L OR 25R FOR TKOF OR LNDG ENCOUNTERS A PROB (IE ENG FAILURES, LOSS OF STEERING, HYDROPLANING, FLAT TIRES), AND IT RESULTS IN A SLIGHT RWY EXCURSION TOWARD THE HOLDING TXWYS, THE POTENTIAL FOR COLLISION WITH THE HOLDING ACFT IS GREAT. ADDENDUM: SINCE THE COMPLETION OF THIS RPT A SIMILAR SITUATION OCCURRED ON OUR FLT OF AUGUST. OUR FLT WAS GIVEN ATC CLRNC FOR TKOF ON RWY 25R. THE CAPT REFUSED THE CLRNC ON ACCOUNT OF A WDB HOLDING ON TXWY 53 IN BTWN RWY 25L AND 25R. THE TAIL OF THE WDB (TAIL POINTED N) WAS EXCEPTIONALLY CLOSE TO THE RWY 25R EDGE. IT IS OBVIOUS NOW THAT ATC IS OPERATING UNDER THE EXPENDIENCY OF MOVING TFC AND NOT BY WHAT IS CONSIDERED SAFE OPERATING PRACTICE.

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.