Narrative:

During back-taxi for a departure on runway 23 (flight of 4) aircraft spotted on short final for runway 23. The 3 remaining aircraft made right turn onto grass strip between runway and road to clear runway for landing traffic. The last or trail aircraft also turned off runway to the right and contacted a sign. Safety concerns must include pilot and passenger along with automatic and pedestrians. (Note: no taxiway exists.) contributing factors: 1) sign was posted very low, top of sign approximately 40 inches (lower than DOT standards?). 2) sign was placed parallel to both runway and road. This makes sign visible from 90 degrees through 45 degrees, approximately 3 ft wide, but through 180 degrees sign is only approximately 1/8 inch wide, insufficient. Corrective action: sign should be placed at eye level or DOT standard (reference stop sign, etc). Place sign on other side of road. This places sign out of reach of both aircraft and automatic. Sign should also be (2) 90 degree signs placed at 45 degrees to road. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that originally this was a taxiway and the powers that be just voted to make it a road for access to houses which have been built beyond the airport. It can no longer be used for a taxiway. There are 4 signs, at the entry way, the exit and 2 places in between. As indicated they are not standard and too low for good visual contact. There is quite a bit of traffic in the area as it is a setting for several festivals during the yr. This makes it very inconvenient for landing and departing traffic coordination due to having to back taxi. The lights have been changed to recessed lights due to vandalism of the frangible runway lights. Analyst spoke to an FAA airport certification safety inspector regarding the 'not FAA approved' indication in the airport facility directory. He indicated it is because of the lighting, not the airport itself. It references the MIRL lighting which is indicated as nonstandard. Reporter of course would like to see standardization of the signage to comply with FAA regulations, and relocation to the other side of the road.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TAYLORCRAFT FORCED TO LEAVE RWY WHEN BACK-TAXIING DUE TO LNDG TFC HITTING SIGN IN GRASS AREA.

Narrative: DURING BACK-TAXI FOR A DEP ON RWY 23 (FLT OF 4) ACFT SPOTTED ON SHORT FINAL FOR RWY 23. THE 3 REMAINING ACFT MADE R TURN ONTO GRASS STRIP BTWN RWY AND ROAD TO CLR RWY FOR LNDG TFC. THE LAST OR TRAIL ACFT ALSO TURNED OFF RWY TO THE R AND CONTACTED A SIGN. SAFETY CONCERNS MUST INCLUDE PLT AND PAX ALONG WITH AUTO AND PEDESTRIANS. (NOTE: NO TXWY EXISTS.) CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) SIGN WAS POSTED VERY LOW, TOP OF SIGN APPROX 40 INCHES (LOWER THAN DOT STANDARDS?). 2) SIGN WAS PLACED PARALLEL TO BOTH RWY AND ROAD. THIS MAKES SIGN VISIBLE FROM 90 DEGS THROUGH 45 DEGS, APPROX 3 FT WIDE, BUT THROUGH 180 DEGS SIGN IS ONLY APPROX 1/8 INCH WIDE, INSUFFICIENT. CORRECTIVE ACTION: SIGN SHOULD BE PLACED AT EYE LEVEL OR DOT STANDARD (REF STOP SIGN, ETC). PLACE SIGN ON OTHER SIDE OF ROAD. THIS PLACES SIGN OUT OF REACH OF BOTH ACFT AND AUTO. SIGN SHOULD ALSO BE (2) 90 DEG SIGNS PLACED AT 45 DEGS TO ROAD. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT ORIGINALLY THIS WAS A TXWY AND THE POWERS THAT BE JUST VOTED TO MAKE IT A ROAD FOR ACCESS TO HOUSES WHICH HAVE BEEN BUILT BEYOND THE ARPT. IT CAN NO LONGER BE USED FOR A TXWY. THERE ARE 4 SIGNS, AT THE ENTRY WAY, THE EXIT AND 2 PLACES IN BTWN. AS INDICATED THEY ARE NOT STANDARD AND TOO LOW FOR GOOD VISUAL CONTACT. THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF TFC IN THE AREA AS IT IS A SETTING FOR SEVERAL FESTIVALS DURING THE YR. THIS MAKES IT VERY INCONVENIENT FOR LNDG AND DEPARTING TFC COORD DUE TO HAVING TO BACK TAXI. THE LIGHTS HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO RECESSED LIGHTS DUE TO VANDALISM OF THE FRANGIBLE RWY LIGHTS. ANALYST SPOKE TO AN FAA ARPT CERTIFICATION SAFETY INSPECTOR REGARDING THE 'NOT FAA APPROVED' INDICATION IN THE ARPT FACILITY DIRECTORY. HE INDICATED IT IS BECAUSE OF THE LIGHTING, NOT THE ARPT ITSELF. IT REFS THE MIRL LIGHTING WHICH IS INDICATED AS NONSTANDARD. RPTR OF COURSE WOULD LIKE TO SEE STANDARDIZATION OF THE SIGNAGE TO COMPLY WITH FAA REGS, AND RELOCATION TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.

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.