Narrative:

We taxied into an area not desired by ord ground/tower control through a combination of factors relating to published documents, lack of airport taxiway signs through a construction area, poor communication from ATC, and radio problems. The area in question is a construction area near the approach ends of runways 27L and 22L. ATIS said departure runways were 22L and 27L from twig intersection and to refer to construction graphic '3-2 day.' when reviewing the graphic prior to pushback we could not see how it was possible to reach runway 22L the way the graphic was depicted and decided to query ground if that runway was assigned. Because of extreme frequency congestion, abbreviated taxi instructions are given at ord. We were told to taxi to runway 22L via the inner and 'red 4' which is shown on page 20-6A as being the wedge and cargo route. Page 20-8A graphic 2-3 day block 9 says that cargo is closed east of taxiway D5 so this is an incomplete instruction. Once we were on cargo taxiway we asked ground for instructions through the construction area. They said to turn right at the barricades and then switched us to tower frequency. At this time it also sounded like we were in a communication dead spot so we monitored the same frequency on the other radio as well to use both antennas. After tuning the second radio to the tower frequency we heard ord tell us to stop our taxi. (We were near the runway 27L parallel and runway 27L pad txwys). They then had us execute a 180 degree turn and gave us more explicit instructions to reach runway 22L. We completed the rest of the flight without incident. We thought we taxied properly according to ATC instruction. However, many factors contributed to confusion in taxiing through a construction area. Chief factors included: poorly drawn diagrams in the manuals -- taxi rtes should also be depicted, and also lack of airport signs. Numerous signs and arrows should point the way to runways -- we saw none. Radio problems at an inopportune time also contributed to the situation. What we thought was a communication dead spot was probably a bad radio. This aircraft had recently had an interphone panel swapped out by maintenance, and after leaving ord we had more transmission/reception problems as well as a reported stuck microphone. (We documented these problems for maintenance.) the frequency congestion and controller workload at ord make it hard to verify instructions that are unclr. We attempted contact a few times before being told to turn near the barricades, but were then given an immediate frequency change which prevented prompt feedback from the controller who gave us the instructions. To their credit, they did spot the error quickly and called on tower frequency with new instructions. (We may not have heard some calls due to reception problems.) the congestion at ord would be tough to fix, but better airport signs showing taxi rtes through the construction areas will definitely cut down on future problems.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG TAXIES WRONG AREA, ATC INTERVENES AND TURNS THEM AROUND.

Narrative: WE TAXIED INTO AN AREA NOT DESIRED BY ORD GND/TWR CTL THROUGH A COMBINATION OF FACTORS RELATING TO PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS, LACK OF ARPT TXWY SIGNS THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION AREA, POOR COM FROM ATC, AND RADIO PROBS. THE AREA IN QUESTION IS A CONSTRUCTION AREA NEAR THE APCH ENDS OF RWYS 27L AND 22L. ATIS SAID DEP RWYS WERE 22L AND 27L FROM TWIG INTXN AND TO REFER TO CONSTRUCTION GRAPHIC '3-2 DAY.' WHEN REVIEWING THE GRAPHIC PRIOR TO PUSHBACK WE COULD NOT SEE HOW IT WAS POSSIBLE TO REACH RWY 22L THE WAY THE GRAPHIC WAS DEPICTED AND DECIDED TO QUERY GND IF THAT RWY WAS ASSIGNED. BECAUSE OF EXTREME FREQ CONGESTION, ABBREVIATED TAXI INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN AT ORD. WE WERE TOLD TO TAXI TO RWY 22L VIA THE INNER AND 'RED 4' WHICH IS SHOWN ON PAGE 20-6A AS BEING THE WEDGE AND CARGO RTE. PAGE 20-8A GRAPHIC 2-3 DAY BLOCK 9 SAYS THAT CARGO IS CLOSED E OF TXWY D5 SO THIS IS AN INCOMPLETE INSTRUCTION. ONCE WE WERE ON CARGO TXWY WE ASKED GND FOR INSTRUCTIONS THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION AREA. THEY SAID TO TURN R AT THE BARRICADES AND THEN SWITCHED US TO TWR FREQ. AT THIS TIME IT ALSO SOUNDED LIKE WE WERE IN A COM DEAD SPOT SO WE MONITORED THE SAME FREQ ON THE OTHER RADIO AS WELL TO USE BOTH ANTENNAS. AFTER TUNING THE SECOND RADIO TO THE TWR FREQ WE HEARD ORD TELL US TO STOP OUR TAXI. (WE WERE NEAR THE RWY 27L PARALLEL AND RWY 27L PAD TXWYS). THEY THEN HAD US EXECUTE A 180 DEG TURN AND GAVE US MORE EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS TO REACH RWY 22L. WE COMPLETED THE REST OF THE FLT WITHOUT INCIDENT. WE THOUGHT WE TAXIED PROPERLY ACCORDING TO ATC INSTRUCTION. HOWEVER, MANY FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO CONFUSION IN TAXIING THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION AREA. CHIEF FACTORS INCLUDED: POORLY DRAWN DIAGRAMS IN THE MANUALS -- TAXI RTES SHOULD ALSO BE DEPICTED, AND ALSO LACK OF ARPT SIGNS. NUMEROUS SIGNS AND ARROWS SHOULD POINT THE WAY TO RWYS -- WE SAW NONE. RADIO PROBS AT AN INOPPORTUNE TIME ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE SIT. WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS A COM DEAD SPOT WAS PROBABLY A BAD RADIO. THIS ACFT HAD RECENTLY HAD AN INTERPHONE PANEL SWAPPED OUT BY MAINT, AND AFTER LEAVING ORD WE HAD MORE XMISSION/RECEPTION PROBS AS WELL AS A RPTED STUCK MIKE. (WE DOCUMENTED THESE PROBS FOR MAINT.) THE FREQ CONGESTION AND CTLR WORKLOAD AT ORD MAKE IT HARD TO VERIFY INSTRUCTIONS THAT ARE UNCLR. WE ATTEMPTED CONTACT A FEW TIMES BEFORE BEING TOLD TO TURN NEAR THE BARRICADES, BUT WERE THEN GIVEN AN IMMEDIATE FREQ CHANGE WHICH PREVENTED PROMPT FEEDBACK FROM THE CTLR WHO GAVE US THE INSTRUCTIONS. TO THEIR CREDIT, THEY DID SPOT THE ERROR QUICKLY AND CALLED ON TWR FREQ WITH NEW INSTRUCTIONS. (WE MAY NOT HAVE HEARD SOME CALLS DUE TO RECEPTION PROBS.) THE CONGESTION AT ORD WOULD BE TOUGH TO FIX, BUT BETTER ARPT SIGNS SHOWING TAXI RTES THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION AREAS WILL DEFINITELY CUT DOWN ON FUTURE PROBS.

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.