Narrative:

2 FBO's having the name xyz exist on separate sides of the airport. Xyz is located on the east side of airport and abc xyz is located on the northwest side of the airport. To me, the possibility of runway incursions exists because of the similar sounding FBO's, and the potential for confusion of the actual position of the aircraft either by the pilot or controller. The manner in which the abc xyz hangars are labeled could mislead the pilot to the aircraft's actual location. The south hangar is idented by a red xyz sign and the north hangar (next to the south hangar) is idented by a like abc sign. If a pilot was ready to taxi from the abc xyz ramp and the aircraft was parked in front of the hangar with the red xyz sign, a pilot very well could call 'ready to taxi from xyz.' the controller hearing xyz believes the aircraft is on the east side of the airport. With runways 19 and 23 being the active runways in use, the controller would taxi the aircraft to runway 23, at which time the aircraft who is actually on the abc xyz ramp could cross runway 19 if not observed on exiting that ramp by the controller. Having 'xyz' associated with both FBO's that are located across the field from each other and across the 2 runways we use most often (runway 1/19 and runway 5/23) creates a potential hazard. To eliminate potential hazard and any confusion, I suggest xyz be used in only one of the FBO names. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the facility management is aware of the problem. Reporter indicated that nothing has been done to resolve the problem.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTED SIT OF 2 FBO LOCATIONS ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE ARPT IDENTED WITH SIMILAR NAMES. RPTR EXPRESSED CONCERN FOR A POSSIBLE RWY INCURSION BY A PLT MISIDENTING THE ACFT LOCATION WHEN CALLING FOR TAXI CLRNC.

Narrative: 2 FBO'S HAVING THE NAME XYZ EXIST ON SEPARATE SIDES OF THE ARPT. XYZ IS LOCATED ON THE E SIDE OF ARPT AND ABC XYZ IS LOCATED ON THE NW SIDE OF THE ARPT. TO ME, THE POSSIBILITY OF RWY INCURSIONS EXISTS BECAUSE OF THE SIMILAR SOUNDING FBO'S, AND THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFUSION OF THE ACTUAL POS OF THE ACFT EITHER BY THE PLT OR CTLR. THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ABC XYZ HANGARS ARE LABELED COULD MISLEAD THE PLT TO THE ACFT'S ACTUAL LOCATION. THE S HANGAR IS IDENTED BY A RED XYZ SIGN AND THE N HANGAR (NEXT TO THE S HANGAR) IS IDENTED BY A LIKE ABC SIGN. IF A PLT WAS READY TO TAXI FROM THE ABC XYZ RAMP AND THE ACFT WAS PARKED IN FRONT OF THE HANGAR WITH THE RED XYZ SIGN, A PLT VERY WELL COULD CALL 'READY TO TAXI FROM XYZ.' THE CTLR HEARING XYZ BELIEVES THE ACFT IS ON THE E SIDE OF THE ARPT. WITH RWYS 19 AND 23 BEING THE ACTIVE RWYS IN USE, THE CTLR WOULD TAXI THE ACFT TO RWY 23, AT WHICH TIME THE ACFT WHO IS ACTUALLY ON THE ABC XYZ RAMP COULD CROSS RWY 19 IF NOT OBSERVED ON EXITING THAT RAMP BY THE CTLR. HAVING 'XYZ' ASSOCIATED WITH BOTH FBO'S THAT ARE LOCATED ACROSS THE FIELD FROM EACH OTHER AND ACROSS THE 2 RWYS WE USE MOST OFTEN (RWY 1/19 AND RWY 5/23) CREATES A POTENTIAL HAZARD. TO ELIMINATE POTENTIAL HAZARD AND ANY CONFUSION, I SUGGEST XYZ BE USED IN ONLY ONE OF THE FBO NAMES. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE FACILITY MGMNT IS AWARE OF THE PROB. RPTR INDICATED THAT NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO RESOLVE THE PROB.

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.