Narrative:

The flight was cleared to taxi from the ramp at dfw to runway 35L via taxiway 29 and the outer--kilo. The nose taxi light was turned on along with the left and right ground flood lights. The right light did not appear to be operating and the first officer was asked to confirm this. He said it was not at this point it became apparent that the aircraft was almost across taxiway K. Runway lights on runway 35L became readily visible at that time and the aircraft was stopped well short of the hold line for runway 35L. There was also an aircraft on takeoff roll at this time. There was no conflict between the aircraft on takeoff and the flight holding short of runway 35L. Certainly the potential does exist. Taxiway lighting in this area is rather brief and taxiway boundaries are difficult to ascertain at night. Also, there are no markings defining taxiway J from the ramp area. Taxiway identify in this area is very difficult--especially at night. Construction in the area further complicates the situation with a multitude of hazard lights. Numerous similar occurrences in recent months identify this as a definite problem area for an inadvertent runway incursion. Recommendations for improving this situation area: 1) improved lighting to identify and define txwys in this area (ramp, inner and outer). The outer K is easily mistaken for the inner J. 2) lighted runway hold lines and signs on taxiway 29. 3) routing aircraft where inadvertent runway entry is not likely (easily implemented). 4) improved reliability of aircraft ground flood lights (burned out bulbs have been a persistent problem). Lastly, the question exists as to why dfw ground control continues to assign this taxi routing when a known serious problem exists. Thank you for your attention in this matter.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TXWY EXCURSION.

Narrative: THE FLT WAS CLRED TO TAXI FROM THE RAMP AT DFW TO RWY 35L VIA TXWY 29 AND THE OUTER--KILO. THE NOSE TAXI LIGHT WAS TURNED ON ALONG WITH THE LEFT AND RIGHT GND FLOOD LIGHTS. THE RIGHT LIGHT DID NOT APPEAR TO BE OPERATING AND THE F/O WAS ASKED TO CONFIRM THIS. HE SAID IT WAS NOT AT THIS POINT IT BECAME APPARENT THAT THE ACFT WAS ALMOST ACROSS TXWY K. RWY LIGHTS ON RWY 35L BECAME READILY VISIBLE AT THAT TIME AND THE ACFT WAS STOPPED WELL SHORT OF THE HOLD LINE FOR RWY 35L. THERE WAS ALSO AN ACFT ON TKOF ROLL AT THIS TIME. THERE WAS NO CONFLICT BTWN THE ACFT ON TKOF AND THE FLT HOLDING SHORT OF RWY 35L. CERTAINLY THE POTENTIAL DOES EXIST. TXWY LIGHTING IN THIS AREA IS RATHER BRIEF AND TXWY BOUNDARIES ARE DIFFICULT TO ASCERTAIN AT NIGHT. ALSO, THERE ARE NO MARKINGS DEFINING TXWY J FROM THE RAMP AREA. TXWY IDENT IN THIS AREA IS VERY DIFFICULT--ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT. CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA FURTHER COMPLICATES THE SITUATION WITH A MULTITUDE OF HAZARD LIGHTS. NUMEROUS SIMILAR OCCURRENCES IN RECENT MONTHS IDENT THIS AS A DEFINITE PROB AREA FOR AN INADVERTENT RWY INCURSION. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING THIS SITUATION AREA: 1) IMPROVED LIGHTING TO IDENT AND DEFINE TXWYS IN THIS AREA (RAMP, INNER AND OUTER). THE OUTER K IS EASILY MISTAKEN FOR THE INNER J. 2) LIGHTED RWY HOLD LINES AND SIGNS ON TXWY 29. 3) ROUTING ACFT WHERE INADVERTENT RWY ENTRY IS NOT LIKELY (EASILY IMPLEMENTED). 4) IMPROVED RELIABILITY OF ACFT GND FLOOD LIGHTS (BURNED OUT BULBS HAVE BEEN A PERSISTENT PROB). LASTLY, THE QUESTION EXISTS AS TO WHY DFW GND CTL CONTINUES TO ASSIGN THIS TAXI ROUTING WHEN A KNOWN SERIOUS PROB EXISTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTN IN THIS MATTER.

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.