Narrative:

Approaching mfe received ATIS indicating txwys a and C closed. Our plan then was to do a 180 degree turn on runway 13 and back-taxi to A-3 for ramp entrance. After landing, a 180 degree turn was made and we were back-taxiing on the landing runway 13 when tower advised us we could use runway 36 to taxi to ramp. We then focused on, and asked whether or not runway 36 intersected runway 13, as it does not appear to on the airport diagram. Tower advised us it did intersect and we could use it for taxiing. We then turned onto it. As we entered runway 36 the captain commented how narrow it was and I then checked the airport diagram and then noticed the weight restr on the runway which was not listed on our company information pages we had referenced prior to landing. A solution to this situation would be to have our company information page list this restr with the others found there, in large type and not only on the airport diagram in small print. And unsure tower personnel do not advise aircraft who are obviously overweight for that surface that they may taxi on it. However, the following day we asked ground if the segment of runway 36 between runway 13 and taxiway a was suitable. They replied 'the weight restr had been lifted due to the construction that was affecting taxiway a. It would be nice to know at the time that the surface was suitable. Supplemental information from acn 303723: at 8 mi from the field I asked the tower if a '180 degree turn' to A3 was the plan for our flight. She replied it was. After landing at night is no time to try to read and interpret very fine print and a flawed diagram.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG FLC RPT ON A PUB DEFICIENCY REGARDING AN AERO CHART PRESENTATION. TXWY CONFIGN TXWY WT LIMITATION EXCEEDED.

Narrative: APCHING MFE RECEIVED ATIS INDICATING TXWYS A AND C CLOSED. OUR PLAN THEN WAS TO DO A 180 DEG TURN ON RWY 13 AND BACK-TAXI TO A-3 FOR RAMP ENTRANCE. AFTER LNDG, A 180 DEG TURN WAS MADE AND WE WERE BACK-TAXIING ON THE LNDG RWY 13 WHEN TWR ADVISED US WE COULD USE RWY 36 TO TAXI TO RAMP. WE THEN FOCUSED ON, AND ASKED WHETHER OR NOT RWY 36 INTERSECTED RWY 13, AS IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO ON THE ARPT DIAGRAM. TWR ADVISED US IT DID INTERSECT AND WE COULD USE IT FOR TAXIING. WE THEN TURNED ONTO IT. AS WE ENTERED RWY 36 THE CAPT COMMENTED HOW NARROW IT WAS AND I THEN CHKED THE ARPT DIAGRAM AND THEN NOTICED THE WT RESTR ON THE RWY WHICH WAS NOT LISTED ON OUR COMPANY INFO PAGES WE HAD REFED PRIOR TO LNDG. A SOLUTION TO THIS SIT WOULD BE TO HAVE OUR COMPANY INFO PAGE LIST THIS RESTR WITH THE OTHERS FOUND THERE, IN LARGE TYPE AND NOT ONLY ON THE ARPT DIAGRAM IN SMALL PRINT. AND UNSURE TWR PERSONNEL DO NOT ADVISE ACFT WHO ARE OBVIOUSLY OVERWT FOR THAT SURFACE THAT THEY MAY TAXI ON IT. HOWEVER, THE FOLLOWING DAY WE ASKED GND IF THE SEGMENT OF RWY 36 BTWN RWY 13 AND TXWY A WAS SUITABLE. THEY REPLIED 'THE WT RESTR HAD BEEN LIFTED DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS AFFECTING TXWY A. IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW AT THE TIME THAT THE SURFACE WAS SUITABLE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 303723: AT 8 MI FROM THE FIELD I ASKED THE TWR IF A '180 DEG TURN' TO A3 WAS THE PLAN FOR OUR FLT. SHE REPLIED IT WAS. AFTER LNDG AT NIGHT IS NO TIME TO TRY TO READ AND INTERPRET VERY FINE PRINT AND A FLAWED DIAGRAM.

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.