Narrative:

I was involved in an incident where a cessna 172 was overturned by a gust of wind while holding on a taxiway. It had been windy all day as a cold front approached from the west. The current conditions were 4500 scattered, 12 mi visibility, and winds of 220 at 15 gusting to 25. The forecast conditions were 2000 scattered, 6000 broken, and winds from 300 at 15 gusting to 30. This is the information I used to make my go/no-go decision. The flight commenced on runway 19 and terminate with a landing on runway 29. After landing, I was told by the tower to hold on a perpendicular taxiway that connected the parallel taxiway to the runway. The tower had reported the winds as 280 at 20 while I was on 1/2 mi final. While waiting on that taxiway I was tipped sideways by a strong gust of wind. Proper crosswind techniques had been used throughout the landing and taxi. The gust caused the airplane to come to rest on the right wingtip, right main wheel, and nosewheel. I later learned the tower had seen gusts as high as 50 KTS. I think the 2 main contributing factors were poor WX reporting and little or no information available on the effects of wind speed on stationary aircraft. Pilots are taught crosswind taxi methods, but no definitive information is given concerning the ability of an aircraft to remain on all 3 wheels exposed to strong winds in either a stationary or moving position. The closest thing given is the demonstrated crosswind, which is specifically applicable to landing. In a review of a 172 manual the only information I could find was that the rear quartering wind was the worst.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LIGHT SINGLE HOLDING ON TXWY GETS BLOWN OVER BY STRONG WIND GUST.

Narrative: I WAS INVOLVED IN AN INCIDENT WHERE A CESSNA 172 WAS OVERTURNED BY A GUST OF WIND WHILE HOLDING ON A TXWY. IT HAD BEEN WINDY ALL DAY AS A COLD FRONT APCHED FROM THE W. THE CURRENT CONDITIONS WERE 4500 SCATTERED, 12 MI VISIBILITY, AND WINDS OF 220 AT 15 GUSTING TO 25. THE FORECAST CONDITIONS WERE 2000 SCATTERED, 6000 BROKEN, AND WINDS FROM 300 AT 15 GUSTING TO 30. THIS IS THE INFO I USED TO MAKE MY GO/NO-GO DECISION. THE FLT COMMENCED ON RWY 19 AND TERMINATE WITH A LNDG ON RWY 29. AFTER LNDG, I WAS TOLD BY THE TWR TO HOLD ON A PERPENDICULAR TXWY THAT CONNECTED THE PARALLEL TXWY TO THE RWY. THE TWR HAD RPTED THE WINDS AS 280 AT 20 WHILE I WAS ON 1/2 MI FINAL. WHILE WAITING ON THAT TXWY I WAS TIPPED SIDEWAYS BY A STRONG GUST OF WIND. PROPER XWIND TECHNIQUES HAD BEEN USED THROUGHOUT THE LNDG AND TAXI. THE GUST CAUSED THE AIRPLANE TO COME TO REST ON THE R WINGTIP, R MAIN WHEEL, AND NOSEWHEEL. I LATER LEARNED THE TWR HAD SEEN GUSTS AS HIGH AS 50 KTS. I THINK THE 2 MAIN CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE POOR WX RPTING AND LITTLE OR NO INFO AVAILABLE ON THE EFFECTS OF WIND SPD ON STATIONARY ACFT. PLTS ARE TAUGHT XWIND TAXI METHODS, BUT NO DEFINITIVE INFO IS GIVEN CONCERNING THE ABILITY OF AN ACFT TO REMAIN ON ALL 3 WHEELS EXPOSED TO STRONG WINDS IN EITHER A STATIONARY OR MOVING POS. THE CLOSEST THING GIVEN IS THE DEMONSTRATED XWIND, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY APPLICABLE TO LNDG. IN A REVIEW OF A 172 MANUAL THE ONLY INFO I COULD FIND WAS THAT THE REAR QUARTERING WIND WAS THE WORST.

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.