Narrative:

A routine ferry flight was flown to spi to deliver a westwind ii for scheduled maintenance. A visual landing was made on runway 22 and the aircraft turned left off the runway onto taxiway H. Ground control was contacted on 121.9 and we were cleared to; 'turn left on taxiway a; cross runway 18; and hold short of runway 31.' the copilot read back the clearance as 'hold short of runway 18;' after which ground control restated the correct clearance as 'hold short of runway 31.' this clearance was read back correctly and understood by the flight crew. Shortly thereafter ground control repeated 'hold short of runway 31.' then cleared us to 'continue on taxiway alpha; left turn on east; hold short of runway 22.' this clearance was acknowledged and complied with. While holding short of runway 22; the ground control asked us to call the tower by phone to discuss a possible pilot deviation. After parking the aircraft; I called the tower. The tower supervisor informed me that we had inadvertently entered and crossed runway 31 in violation of a clearance causing a light plane approaching the airport to be instructed to go around. He also informed me that he was issuing a report on the incident. We subsequently reviewed the tapes that afternoon which to me seemed inconclusive. Contributing factors: 1) there were no standard red runway warning signs on taxiway a for either runway 18 or runway 31; even though the standard red runway warning signs were clearly visible for txwys intersecting with runway 04-22. 2) any painted stripes on the surface of taxiway a were indistinct and faded making it difficult to identify the runway intersection; especially from the low seating position of a westwind ii aircraft. Additional comments: a pilot who is cleared to hold short of a runway should have a reasonable expectation that standard red runway intersection warning signs are installed at all runway crossing intxns especially after observing these signs at intxns with another runway on the same airport. In the above case; I was specifically looking for these standard signs to identify the intersection with runway 31 so we could hold short of it. I feel that if these runway warning signs are not consistent over the entire airport that this fact should be published as a NOTAM to alert pilots to this hazard.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF WW24 BELIEVES RWY INCURSION AT SPI WAS DUE TO SIGNAGE ISSUES AND FADED TXWY MARKINGS.

Narrative: A ROUTINE FERRY FLT WAS FLOWN TO SPI TO DELIVER A WESTWIND II FOR SCHEDULED MAINT. A VISUAL LNDG WAS MADE ON RWY 22 AND THE ACFT TURNED LEFT OFF THE RWY ONTO TXWY H. GND CTL WAS CONTACTED ON 121.9 AND WE WERE CLRED TO; 'TURN LEFT ON TXWY A; CROSS RWY 18; AND HOLD SHORT OF RWY 31.' THE COPLT READ BACK THE CLRNC AS 'HOLD SHORT OF RWY 18;' AFTER WHICH GND CTL RESTATED THE CORRECT CLRNC AS 'HOLD SHORT OF RWY 31.' THIS CLRNC WAS READ BACK CORRECTLY AND UNDERSTOOD BY THE FLT CREW. SHORTLY THEREAFTER GND CTL REPEATED 'HOLD SHORT OF RWY 31.' THEN CLRED US TO 'CONTINUE ON TXWY ALPHA; L TURN ON E; HOLD SHORT OF RWY 22.' THIS CLRNC WAS ACKNOWLEDGED AND COMPLIED WITH. WHILE HOLDING SHORT OF RWY 22; THE GND CTL ASKED US TO CALL THE TWR BY PHONE TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE PLT DEVIATION. AFTER PARKING THE ACFT; I CALLED THE TWR. THE TWR SUPVR INFORMED ME THAT WE HAD INADVERTENTLY ENTERED AND CROSSED RWY 31 IN VIOLATION OF A CLRNC CAUSING A LIGHT PLANE APCHING THE ARPT TO BE INSTRUCTED TO GAR. HE ALSO INFORMED ME THAT HE WAS ISSUING A RPT ON THE INCIDENT. WE SUBSEQUENTLY REVIEWED THE TAPES THAT AFTERNOON WHICH TO ME SEEMED INCONCLUSIVE. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) THERE WERE NO STANDARD RED RWY WARNING SIGNS ON TXWY A FOR EITHER RWY 18 OR RWY 31; EVEN THOUGH THE STANDARD RED RWY WARNING SIGNS WERE CLRLY VISIBLE FOR TXWYS INTERSECTING WITH RWY 04-22. 2) ANY PAINTED STRIPES ON THE SURFACE OF TXWY A WERE INDISTINCT AND FADED MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY THE RWY INTXN; ESPECIALLY FROM THE LOW SEATING POSITION OF A WESTWIND II ACFT. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: A PLT WHO IS CLRED TO HOLD SHORT OF A RWY SHOULD HAVE A REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT STANDARD RED RWY INTXN WARNING SIGNS ARE INSTALLED AT ALL RWY CROSSING INTXNS ESPECIALLY AFTER OBSERVING THESE SIGNS AT INTXNS WITH ANOTHER RWY ON THE SAME ARPT. IN THE ABOVE CASE; I WAS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR THESE STANDARD SIGNS TO IDENTIFY THE INTXN WITH RWY 31 SO WE COULD HOLD SHORT OF IT. I FEEL THAT IF THESE RWY WARNING SIGNS ARE NOT CONSISTENT OVER THE ENTIRE ARPT THAT THIS FACT SHOULD BE PUBLISHED AS A NOTAM TO ALERT PLTS TO THIS HAZARD.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.