Narrative:

I cleared runway 6 at mvy onto runway 15 over 1 hour past sunset and began to taxi toward the terminal. I turned into what appeared to be the midpoint of where the 2 runways converged and I lined up on what I believed was the centerline. I taxied a short distance before I saw blue lights ahead and determined that since I had no access to the parallel taxiway ahead that I must have gotten into a non-movement area. I taxied toward the right (toward the gap in the blue lights on the parallel taxiway) and while doing so struck a runway light for runway 15/33 which I believe must have been unlit as neither my first officer or I saw it. I struck it with the propellers on the left engine. What seems relevant and in need of remedy are the following: runway used to be paved to 150 ft width. To save money the runway was overlaid only to a 75 ft width and the runway lights were accordingly relocated to the new edge. Even though runway 15/33 is a non-precision runway, the airport management painted the new runway 15/33 edge with a white stripe (what I later thought was the runway centerline). There is no difference in elevation between the old surface and new, the transition is smooth. There are no chevrons marking the old asphalt area as non-movement shoulder or defining the limits of usable pavement on runway 15/33. I believe another aircraft may have had a similar experience and struck the runway light before I did. Since neither my first officer or I saw the light cross our line of vision or ever observed it, I suspect it was not lit. The tower is a contract tower which closes at 5 pm. I received no information as to the status of missing field lighting. I have flown commercially as captain to this airport for over 5 yrs and consider myself familiar with the layout of the airport and therefore find this disorientation worrisome and worthy of a report. I believe chevron markings should be placed at least on the portion of runway 15 that would routinely be used as a taxiway for egress to runway 6/24. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states there is no way to tell which side of the edge lights one is moving. The reporter thought the lights were centerline lights. Both he and the first officer are sure the light they hit was not lit or they would not have turned at that point. Reporter's company of course is concerned due to propeller damage. Airport manager has been known to reporter for some time and stated that this kind of incident happens all the time. They just keep replacing the light. It seems the appropriate thing to do would be to place chevrons on the unusable area of the runway, not just leave it as is. This is a commonly used turn off (onto the intersecting runway) when tower is in operation. When tower is closed both sets of runway lights are left on so it is used at night as well.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMMUTER ACFT HITS RWY LIGHT TURNING OFF ACTIVE RWY. INTERSECTING RWY WAS NARROWED AND LIGHTING MOVED.

Narrative: I CLRED RWY 6 AT MVY ONTO RWY 15 OVER 1 HR PAST SUNSET AND BEGAN TO TAXI TOWARD THE TERMINAL. I TURNED INTO WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE MIDPOINT OF WHERE THE 2 RWYS CONVERGED AND I LINED UP ON WHAT I BELIEVED WAS THE CTRLINE. I TAXIED A SHORT DISTANCE BEFORE I SAW BLUE LIGHTS AHEAD AND DETERMINED THAT SINCE I HAD NO ACCESS TO THE PARALLEL TXWY AHEAD THAT I MUST HAVE GOTTEN INTO A NON-MOVEMENT AREA. I TAXIED TOWARD THE R (TOWARD THE GAP IN THE BLUE LIGHTS ON THE PARALLEL TXWY) AND WHILE DOING SO STRUCK A RWY LIGHT FOR RWY 15/33 WHICH I BELIEVE MUST HAVE BEEN UNLIT AS NEITHER MY FO OR I SAW IT. I STRUCK IT WITH THE PROPS ON THE L ENG. WHAT SEEMS RELEVANT AND IN NEED OF REMEDY ARE THE FOLLOWING: RWY USED TO BE PAVED TO 150 FT WIDTH. TO SAVE MONEY THE RWY WAS OVERLAID ONLY TO A 75 FT WIDTH AND THE RWY LIGHTS WERE ACCORDINGLY RELOCATED TO THE NEW EDGE. EVEN THOUGH RWY 15/33 IS A NON-PRECISION RWY, THE ARPT MGMNT PAINTED THE NEW RWY 15/33 EDGE WITH A WHITE STRIPE (WHAT I LATER THOUGHT WAS THE RWY CTRLINE). THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN ELEVATION BTWN THE OLD SURFACE AND NEW, THE TRANSITION IS SMOOTH. THERE ARE NO CHEVRONS MARKING THE OLD ASPHALT AREA AS NON-MOVEMENT SHOULDER OR DEFINING THE LIMITS OF USABLE PAVEMENT ON RWY 15/33. I BELIEVE ANOTHER ACFT MAY HAVE HAD A SIMILAR EXPERIENCE AND STRUCK THE RWY LIGHT BEFORE I DID. SINCE NEITHER MY FO OR I SAW THE LIGHT CROSS OUR LINE OF VISION OR EVER OBSERVED IT, I SUSPECT IT WAS NOT LIT. THE TWR IS A CONTRACT TWR WHICH CLOSES AT 5 PM. I RECEIVED NO INFO AS TO THE STATUS OF MISSING FIELD LIGHTING. I HAVE FLOWN COMMERCIALLY AS CAPT TO THIS ARPT FOR OVER 5 YRS AND CONSIDER MYSELF FAMILIAR WITH THE LAYOUT OF THE ARPT AND THEREFORE FIND THIS DISORIENTATION WORRISOME AND WORTHY OF A RPT. I BELIEVE CHEVRON MARKINGS SHOULD BE PLACED AT LEAST ON THE PORTION OF RWY 15 THAT WOULD ROUTINELY BE USED AS A TXWY FOR EGRESS TO RWY 6/24. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL WHICH SIDE OF THE EDGE LIGHTS ONE IS MOVING. THE RPTR THOUGHT THE LIGHTS WERE CTRLINE LIGHTS. BOTH HE AND THE FO ARE SURE THE LIGHT THEY HIT WAS NOT LIT OR THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TURNED AT THAT POINT. RPTR'S COMPANY OF COURSE IS CONCERNED DUE TO PROP DAMAGE. ARPT MGR HAS BEEN KNOWN TO RPTR FOR SOME TIME AND STATED THAT THIS KIND OF INCIDENT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. THEY JUST KEEP REPLACING THE LIGHT. IT SEEMS THE APPROPRIATE THING TO DO WOULD BE TO PLACE CHEVRONS ON THE UNUSABLE AREA OF THE RWY, NOT JUST LEAVE IT AS IS. THIS IS A COMMONLY USED TURN OFF (ONTO THE INTERSECTING RWY) WHEN TWR IS IN OP. WHEN TWR IS CLOSED BOTH SETS OF RWY LIGHTS ARE LEFT ON SO IT IS USED AT NIGHT AS WELL.

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.