Narrative:

Before taxiing from the grr terminal we were clrd to taxi to runway 26L. No route instructions were given with the taxi clearance. We received the salute and guidance direction from the mechanic towards taxiway V. The right turn from the terminal was towards taxiway V which was about 100 yds away to the east. When we landed on 26L about 40 mins earlier, another aircraft had been clrd to 26L via V and B txwys to avoid conflict with us exiting 26L and entering the terminal ramp area. There was another aircraft parked in the middle of the terminal ramp, which required tight maneuvering to enter the terminal ramp area. As we were turning right from the terminal another aircraft had landed and exited 26L. It looked like these 2 aircraft would cause a conflict for us to exit the ramp via the way we had entered and this, plus the previous aircraft's taxi instructions seemed to indicate that our route to 26L was natural. After we were on taxiway V and about to turn onto B the first officer finally was able to interpret the approach page note about these txwys being restr for aircraft of our weight. By this time our only options were to stop, or continue on B to the parallel taxiway to 26L. At the time I thought that the safest way was to continue to taxi and not stop since we were not experiencing any problems. When we exited B, we couldn't see any damage evidence on B, and we didn't notice any difference in the sound or feel of the taxiing aircraft. An exterior inspection of the aircraft did not reveal any damage or evidence of anything unusual to the under surface or to the landing gear. Throughout our taxi on the ramp to taxiway V, and during our taxiing on V and B, and 8-26 parallel, ground control did not indicate that there was any problem with our route to 26L. Usually taxi instructions from ground control specify the specific route to the takeoff runway. They should be included -- they should be mandatory when there are problem txwys. A sign on the ground, indicating that the taxiway is weight restr, would indicate that further checking was required before entering the taxiway. I had reviewed the airport page prior to landing at grr, but at the time of leaving the terminal, the several other indications seemed to indicate a route, on victor, and bravo to be logical and I forgot about the weight restr txwys. Large X's on the restr txwys marked on the airport page would help to highlight the restriction. The small print was too hard to interpret while we were taxiing and was confusing. The ground controller, if he was paying attention, should have noticed our route prior to entering taxiway V and called us to give us the correct route to taxi to 26L.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TAXIED ACFT ON WEIGHT RESTRICTED TXWY.

Narrative: BEFORE TAXIING FROM THE GRR TERMINAL WE WERE CLRD TO TAXI TO RWY 26L. NO ROUTE INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN WITH THE TAXI CLRNC. WE RECEIVED THE SALUTE AND GUIDANCE DIRECTION FROM THE MECHANIC TOWARDS TXWY V. THE RIGHT TURN FROM THE TERMINAL WAS TOWARDS TXWY V WHICH WAS ABOUT 100 YDS AWAY TO THE EAST. WHEN WE LANDED ON 26L ABOUT 40 MINS EARLIER, ANOTHER ACFT HAD BEEN CLRD TO 26L VIA V AND B TXWYS TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH US EXITING 26L AND ENTERING THE TERMINAL RAMP AREA. THERE WAS ANOTHER ACFT PARKED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TERMINAL RAMP, WHICH REQUIRED TIGHT MANEUVERING TO ENTER THE TERMINAL RAMP AREA. AS WE WERE TURNING RIGHT FROM THE TERMINAL ANOTHER ACFT HAD LANDED AND EXITED 26L. IT LOOKED LIKE THESE 2 ACFT WOULD CAUSE A CONFLICT FOR US TO EXIT THE RAMP VIA THE WAY WE HAD ENTERED AND THIS, PLUS THE PREVIOUS ACFT'S TAXI INSTRUCTIONS SEEMED TO INDICATE THAT OUR ROUTE TO 26L WAS NATURAL. AFTER WE WERE ON TXWY V AND ABOUT TO TURN ONTO B THE F/O FINALLY WAS ABLE TO INTERPRET THE APCH PAGE NOTE ABOUT THESE TXWYS BEING RESTR FOR ACFT OF OUR WEIGHT. BY THIS TIME OUR ONLY OPTIONS WERE TO STOP, OR CONTINUE ON B TO THE PARALLEL TXWY TO 26L. AT THE TIME I THOUGHT THAT THE SAFEST WAY WAS TO CONTINUE TO TAXI AND NOT STOP SINCE WE WERE NOT EXPERIENCING ANY PROBLEMS. WHEN WE EXITED B, WE COULDN'T SEE ANY DAMAGE EVIDENCE ON B, AND WE DIDN'T NOTICE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE SOUND OR FEEL OF THE TAXIING ACFT. AN EXTERIOR INSPECTION OF THE ACFT DID NOT REVEAL ANY DAMAGE OR EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING UNUSUAL TO THE UNDER SURFACE OR TO THE LNDG GEAR. THROUGHOUT OUR TAXI ON THE RAMP TO TXWY V, AND DURING OUR TAXIING ON V AND B, AND 8-26 PARALLEL, GND CTL DID NOT INDICATE THAT THERE WAS ANY PROBLEM WITH OUR ROUTE TO 26L. USUALLY TAXI INSTRUCTIONS FROM GND CTL SPECIFY THE SPECIFIC ROUTE TO THE TKOF RWY. THEY SHOULD BE INCLUDED -- THEY SHOULD BE MANDATORY WHEN THERE ARE PROBLEM TXWYS. A SIGN ON THE GND, INDICATING THAT THE TXWY IS WEIGHT RESTR, WOULD INDICATE THAT FURTHER CHECKING WAS REQUIRED BEFORE ENTERING THE TXWY. I HAD REVIEWED THE ARPT PAGE PRIOR TO LNDG AT GRR, BUT AT THE TIME OF LEAVING THE TERMINAL, THE SEVERAL OTHER INDICATIONS SEEMED TO INDICATE A ROUTE, ON VICTOR, AND BRAVO TO BE LOGICAL AND I FORGOT ABOUT THE WEIGHT RESTR TXWYS. LARGE X'S ON THE RESTR TXWYS MARKED ON THE ARPT PAGE WOULD HELP TO HIGHLIGHT THE RESTRICTION. THE SMALL PRINT WAS TOO HARD TO INTERPRET WHILE WE WERE TAXIING AND WAS CONFUSING. THE GND CTLR, IF HE WAS PAYING ATTN, SHOULD HAVE NOTICED OUR ROUTE PRIOR TO ENTERING TXWY V AND CALLED US TO GIVE US THE CORRECT ROUTE TO TAXI TO 26L.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.