Narrative:

Due to severe field and WX conditions at sux, several conference calls were held with dispatch to ensure safe and prudent flight could be conducted. The decision to depart was agreed upon when a landing aircraft at sux reported fair to good braking and the sux tower agreed to remain open for our landing. The aircraft was stopped on the runway at sux just beyond taxiway D where the tower instructed a 180 degree turn on the runway to return to taxiway D to the terminal. While stopping the aircraft with reverse thrust spoilers extended, braking and headwind of 40 mph wind was no problem, taxiing was a different story. The aircraft was turning left on the 180 degree turn to the terminal when at about 120 degree in the turn, the wind prevented any further turn and the plane slid slowly toward the edge of the runway. We were able to stop, however, about 34 ft short of the runway edge still on the runway. The brakes were set, chocks were placed under the wheels, passenger removed by vehicle to the terminal. After consultation with company officials the decision was to tow the aircraft to the ramp. However, it was impossible even with an assist with another vehicle at the front of the tug pulling in tandem. The parking brake was reset, chocks reinstalled and the airplane was secured as best as possible until WX conditions improved. Just prior to the crew leaving the plane, the wind blew the plane sideways, wxvaning. Off the runway about 30 ft nose first before stopping (main gear still on runway). Plane was removed successfully with no damage several hours later. Although everything leading up to this flight was briefed and agreed upon, I feel crew members need more precise information particularly in severe conditions, as to true conditions. For example, braking action reports are very subjective and can even be misleading. NOTAMS can be fairly precise technically but not provide operational input which truly informs crews. Ie: consistency of now which affects traction greatly -- add very strong wind which could also change the situation. Maybe straight language reports may be appropriate such as: conditions are hazardous due to etc, etc.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN LGT CREW LANDED SAFELY IN A HIGH WIND CONDITION ON A SLICK RWY WITHOUT DAMAGE OR INJURY. THEY WERE UNABLE TO TAXI DUE TO THE HIGH WINDS AND ICE AND HAD TO ABANDON THE ACFT ON THE RWY.

Narrative: DUE TO SEVERE FIELD AND WX CONDITIONS AT SUX, SEVERAL CONFERENCE CALLS WERE HELD WITH DISPATCH TO ENSURE SAFE AND PRUDENT FLT COULD BE CONDUCTED. THE DECISION TO DEPART WAS AGREED UPON WHEN A LNDG ACFT AT SUX RPTED FAIR TO GOOD BRAKING AND THE SUX TWR AGREED TO REMAIN OPEN FOR OUR LNDG. THE ACFT WAS STOPPED ON THE RWY AT SUX JUST BEYOND TAXIWAY D WHERE THE TWR INSTRUCTED A 180 DEG TURN ON THE RWY TO RETURN TO TAXIWAY D TO THE TERMINAL. WHILE STOPPING THE ACFT WITH REVERSE THRUST SPOILERS EXTENDED, BRAKING AND HEADWIND OF 40 MPH WIND WAS NO PROBLEM, TAXIING WAS A DIFFERENT STORY. THE ACFT WAS TURNING L ON THE 180 DEG TURN TO THE TERMINAL WHEN AT ABOUT 120 DEG IN THE TURN, THE WIND PREVENTED ANY FURTHER TURN AND THE PLANE SLID SLOWLY TOWARD THE EDGE OF THE RWY. WE WERE ABLE TO STOP, HOWEVER, ABOUT 34 FT SHORT OF THE RWY EDGE STILL ON THE RWY. THE BRAKES WERE SET, CHOCKS WERE PLACED UNDER THE WHEELS, PAX REMOVED BY VEHICLE TO THE TERMINAL. AFTER CONSULTATION WITH COMPANY OFFICIALS THE DECISION WAS TO TOW THE ACFT TO THE RAMP. HOWEVER, IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE EVEN WITH AN ASSIST WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE AT THE FRONT OF THE TUG PULLING IN TANDEM. THE PARKING BRAKE WAS RESET, CHOCKS REINSTALLED AND THE AIRPLANE WAS SECURED AS BEST AS POSSIBLE UNTIL WX CONDITIONS IMPROVED. JUST PRIOR TO THE CREW LEAVING THE PLANE, THE WIND BLEW THE PLANE SIDEWAYS, WXVANING. OFF THE RWY ABOUT 30 FT NOSE FIRST BEFORE STOPPING (MAIN GEAR STILL ON RWY). PLANE WAS REMOVED SUCCESSFULLY WITH NO DAMAGE SEVERAL HRS LATER. ALTHOUGH EVERYTHING LEADING UP TO THIS FLT WAS BRIEFED AND AGREED UPON, I FEEL CREW MEMBERS NEED MORE PRECISE INFO PARTICULARLY IN SEVERE CONDITIONS, AS TO TRUE CONDITIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, BRAKING ACTION RPTS ARE VERY SUBJECTIVE AND CAN EVEN BE MISLEADING. NOTAMS CAN BE FAIRLY PRECISE TECHNICALLY BUT NOT PROVIDE OPERATIONAL INPUT WHICH TRULY INFORMS CREWS. IE: CONSISTENCY OF NOW WHICH AFFECTS TRACTION GREATLY -- ADD VERY STRONG WIND WHICH COULD ALSO CHANGE THE SITUATION. MAYBE STRAIGHT LANGUAGE RPTS MAY BE APPROPRIATE SUCH AS: CONDITIONS ARE HAZARDOUS DUE TO ETC, ETC.

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.