Narrative:

I was issued a taxi clearance to runway 26 via alpha romeo. Romeo contains a run-up area. After completing my run-up I taxied forward on romeo to pull up to the runway and briefly accidentally crossed the hold-short line that exists immediately after the run-up area. There were no other aircraft arriving or departing the runway at that time. I immediately turned to return to the correct side of the hold-short line. As pilot in command I'm accountable for that mistake. I will be more vigilant in confusing taxi situations in the future. However; in revisiting the location and reviewing what happened it is clear there are many compounding factors that contributed to this occurrence.the actual taxiway design at this location differs significantly from what appears on either the FAA or the jeppesen charts. Charts show a single exit leaving the far end of the romeo run-up area and if your clearance is '26 via alpha romeo' this is clearly the path you would take. However; the actual taxi-way design includes two parallel taxi-ways that simply do not appear on the charts at all. The chart is not at all an accurate picture of what actually exists there.if you follow the pathway for romeo indicated on the chart there is no runway number that you would usually find when approaching a hold short line. There are also no 'hash' marks on the center line that warn you of the approaching hold-short line. There are these numbers and center line hashes further down this stretch of taxi-way for traffic exiting other ramps; but again according to the chart this taxiway doesn't even exist thus there's no reason a pilot would start heading down that direction. While there are center-line markings on the romeo taxiway that suggest one should not follow the pathway to exit the run-up area via the route indicated by the chart (showing that romeo exits the run-up area right at the far end of the run-up area) this yellow paint is faded and lacks the usual black outline typically seen when yellow airport markings are painting on concrete. This makes it very difficult to see these markings.while there is a hold short line painted at the exit of the romeo ramp the paint is faded and is painted directly at the transition point where the surface changes from white concrete to black asphalt. This makes it extremely difficult to see as the yellow paint blends into the adjacent concrete. Furthermore; the lack of a runway number warning sign on the surface when following the path outlined by the taxi charts and the lack of hashes on the centerline adds to the lack of a clearly visible hold short line at the edge of the run-up area. Again key to the confusion is that the route depicted for aircraft on the chart is apparently not the route intended with the faded paint markings indicating aircraft should follow the taxiway that's missing from the charts.the area in question is marked as a 'hot spot' on taxi diagrams and I did review these prior to visiting the airport. However; the text of the 'hot spot' just says 'confusing taxiway configuration' which is really a useless bit of information to the pilot. This information should be much more specific and clearly mention actionable things for a pilot to look out for like the unconventional and confusing positioning of the hold short lines. Of course one reason the taxiway is 'confusing' is because the chart is wrong; so clearly the chart needs to be fixed!the taxiways on much of the airport are in poor condition with plants several ft. Tall growing through cracks. This was very distracting as I had to constantly swerve to avoid having my prop go through plants. This significant distraction certainly contributed to missing the already confusing taxiway markings. Pilots should not be expected to play 'plant slalom' when following a taxi clearance at a controlled airfield.in reviewing the report; there are several previous reports describing scenarios similar to the above at this location. It's clear some adjustments need to be made to make the hold short line more clear and the charts need to be corrected to depict the taxiway configuration as it actually exists. The line painting also needs to be altered or significantly improved including addressing the odd choice of painting a yellow hold short line directly on the transition between concrete and asphalt.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Pilot reported a runway incursion partially due to incorrect DXR airport taxiway diagram.

Narrative: I was issued a taxi clearance to Runway 26 via Alpha Romeo. Romeo contains a run-up area. After completing my run-up I taxied forward on Romeo to pull up to the runway and briefly accidentally crossed the hold-short line that exists immediately after the run-up area. There were no other aircraft arriving or departing the runway at that time. I immediately turned to return to the correct side of the hold-short line. As Pilot in Command I'm accountable for that mistake. I will be more vigilant in confusing taxi situations in the future. However; in revisiting the location and reviewing what happened it is clear there are many compounding factors that contributed to this occurrence.The actual taxiway design at this location differs significantly from what appears on either the FAA or the Jeppesen charts. Charts show a single exit leaving the far end of the Romeo run-up area and if your clearance is '26 via Alpha Romeo' this is clearly the path you would take. However; the actual taxi-way design includes two parallel taxi-ways that simply do not appear on the charts at all. The chart is not at all an accurate picture of what actually exists there.If you follow the pathway for Romeo indicated on the chart there is no runway number that you would usually find when approaching a hold short line. There are also no 'hash' marks on the center line that warn you of the approaching hold-short line. There are these numbers and center line hashes further down this stretch of taxi-way for traffic exiting other ramps; but again according to the chart this taxiway doesn't even exist thus there's no reason a pilot would start heading down that direction. While there are center-line markings on the Romeo taxiway that suggest one should not follow the pathway to exit the run-up area via the route indicated by the chart (showing that Romeo exits the run-up area right at the far end of the run-up area) this yellow paint is faded and lacks the usual black outline typically seen when yellow airport markings are painting on concrete. This makes it very difficult to see these markings.While there is a hold short line painted at the exit of the Romeo ramp the paint is faded and is painted directly at the transition point where the surface changes from white concrete to black asphalt. This makes it extremely difficult to see as the yellow paint blends into the adjacent concrete. Furthermore; the lack of a runway number warning sign on the surface when following the path outlined by the taxi charts and the lack of hashes on the centerline adds to the lack of a clearly visible hold short line at the edge of the run-up area. Again key to the confusion is that the route depicted for aircraft on the chart is apparently not the route intended with the faded paint markings indicating aircraft should follow the taxiway that's missing from the charts.The area in question is marked as a 'hot spot' on taxi diagrams and I did review these prior to visiting the airport. However; the text of the 'hot spot' just says 'confusing taxiway configuration' which is really a useless bit of information to the pilot. This information should be much more specific and clearly mention actionable things for a pilot to look out for like the unconventional and confusing positioning of the hold short lines. Of course one reason the taxiway is 'confusing' is because the chart is wrong; so clearly the chart needs to be fixed!The taxiways on much of the airport are in poor condition with plants several ft. tall growing through cracks. This was very distracting as I had to constantly swerve to avoid having my prop go through plants. This significant distraction certainly contributed to missing the already confusing taxiway markings. Pilots should not be expected to play 'plant slalom' when following a taxi clearance at a controlled airfield.In reviewing the report; there are several previous reports describing scenarios similar to the above at this location. It's clear some adjustments need to be made to make the hold short line more clear and the charts need to be corrected to depict the taxiway configuration as it actually exists. The line painting also needs to be altered or significantly improved including addressing the odd choice of painting a yellow hold short line directly on the transition between concrete and asphalt.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.