Narrative:

Unsafe ground control practices -- high potential for runway incursion. We were cleared to taxi from concourse B to runway 21C via taxiway F, runway 9L and taxiway M. It appears to be standard practice for detroit ground control to use runways not in use for takeoff/landing as txwys (ie, taxi on runway 9/27 while taking off and landing on runway 3/21). This is a potentially hazardous practice for a number of reasons. The cockpit in a transport category aircraft is quite busy when taxiing for takeoff (checklists, closeout number calculations, etc). It's not unusual for 1 crewmember to have his head down leaving only 1 set of eyes outside the taxi instructions given (no doubt many times a day) require, without exception, that the aircraft is turned from the runway (used for taxi) onto a taxiway (in this case runway 9L to taxiway M). If the turn is missed the aircraft is immediately in the middle of an active runway (in this case, being used for high volume morning departures, every 3 mins). There are no hold bars and very little in the way of a taxiway designator unless the crew happens to look well to the left. (Consider runway width of 200 ft for runway 9L -- nearest taxiway designator is at least 100-120 ft away!) only a moment of inattn or just a look down at the airport diagram could be disastrous -- and this is with 3 mi visibility. From my experience, detroit is the only airport in the united states that uses this practice of taxiing on runways as a regular procedure. I think with detroit's history of runway incursion accidents they would want to do everything possible to prevent future problems. The solution is simple: use txwys for taxi and runways for takeoff/landing. Convince the detroit tower chief to abandon this unsafe practice. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: this reporter was in an MD80 (super). He had several people tell him that using the runway for taxi is a regular procedure at dtw. He feels this is an accident waiting to happen. A momentary distraction taxiing east so as to miss taxiway M and the aircraft would be out on runway 21C before anyone could do anything about it. He reiterated the runway is 200 ft wide, not the normal 150 ft and no hold line or marking and the signs are not particularly obvious to indicate or differentiate the txwys. And it seems so unnecessary from the pilot point of view.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR BELIEVES ROUTINELY USING RWYS AS TXWYS IS UNSAFE.

Narrative: UNSAFE GND CTL PRACTICES -- HIGH POTENTIAL FOR RWY INCURSION. WE WERE CLRED TO TAXI FROM CONCOURSE B TO RWY 21C VIA TXWY F, RWY 9L AND TXWY M. IT APPEARS TO BE STANDARD PRACTICE FOR DETROIT GND CTL TO USE RWYS NOT IN USE FOR TKOF/LNDG AS TXWYS (IE, TAXI ON RWY 9/27 WHILE TAKING OFF AND LNDG ON RWY 3/21). THIS IS A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS PRACTICE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. THE COCKPIT IN A TRANSPORT CATEGORY ACFT IS QUITE BUSY WHEN TAXIING FOR TKOF (CHKLISTS, CLOSEOUT NUMBER CALCULATIONS, ETC). IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR 1 CREWMEMBER TO HAVE HIS HEAD DOWN LEAVING ONLY 1 SET OF EYES OUTSIDE THE TAXI INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN (NO DOUBT MANY TIMES A DAY) REQUIRE, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, THAT THE ACFT IS TURNED FROM THE RWY (USED FOR TAXI) ONTO A TXWY (IN THIS CASE RWY 9L TO TXWY M). IF THE TURN IS MISSED THE ACFT IS IMMEDIATELY IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ACTIVE RWY (IN THIS CASE, BEING USED FOR HIGH VOLUME MORNING DEPS, EVERY 3 MINS). THERE ARE NO HOLD BARS AND VERY LITTLE IN THE WAY OF A TXWY DESIGNATOR UNLESS THE CREW HAPPENS TO LOOK WELL TO THE L. (CONSIDER RWY WIDTH OF 200 FT FOR RWY 9L -- NEAREST TXWY DESIGNATOR IS AT LEAST 100-120 FT AWAY!) ONLY A MOMENT OF INATTN OR JUST A LOOK DOWN AT THE ARPT DIAGRAM COULD BE DISASTROUS -- AND THIS IS WITH 3 MI VISIBILITY. FROM MY EXPERIENCE, DETROIT IS THE ONLY ARPT IN THE UNITED STATES THAT USES THIS PRACTICE OF TAXIING ON RWYS AS A REGULAR PROC. I THINK WITH DETROIT'S HISTORY OF RWY INCURSION ACCIDENTS THEY WOULD WANT TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PREVENT FUTURE PROBS. THE SOLUTION IS SIMPLE: USE TXWYS FOR TAXI AND RWYS FOR TKOF/LNDG. CONVINCE THE DETROIT TWR CHIEF TO ABANDON THIS UNSAFE PRACTICE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THIS RPTR WAS IN AN MD80 (SUPER). HE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE TELL HIM THAT USING THE RWY FOR TAXI IS A REGULAR PROC AT DTW. HE FEELS THIS IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. A MOMENTARY DISTR TAXIING E SO AS TO MISS TXWY M AND THE ACFT WOULD BE OUT ON RWY 21C BEFORE ANYONE COULD DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. HE REITERATED THE RWY IS 200 FT WIDE, NOT THE NORMAL 150 FT AND NO HOLD LINE OR MARKING AND THE SIGNS ARE NOT PARTICULARLY OBVIOUS TO INDICATE OR DIFFERENTIATE THE TXWYS. AND IT SEEMS SO UNNECESSARY FROM THE PLT POINT OF VIEW.

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.