Narrative:

Grr runway 26L under construction. 5400 ft available for landing. 4500 ft displaced threshold. 5795 ft available for takeoff. Nonstandard signage in place. We were cleared to back taxi onto runway 26L to takeoff. While back taxiing captain taxied over a 3 inch lip onto a non load-bearing surface. This area was not marked and it was dusk. We feel there should have been cones or something marking where the runway ended and the construction surface begins. In addition for the approach there is a 25 ft sand hill you fly over within 1000 ft of touchdown that is not marked. Also the one light pulsating VASI works only so, so. It is so bad, unreliable that now the control tower turns it off at night. Numerous complaints have been filed by our airline and new restrs on grr airport operations come out on a daily basis. With improper signage and no markings showing the displaced threshold without even the runway numbers painted could mean a potentially dangerous mishap at this airport. We were lucky, no damage and slow taxi speed. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated he was copilot on a DC9-50. He stated there is no precision approach to the airport although there is an ILS published, it is OTS. There is no VASI to runway 26L as is stated in the airport facilities directory. There is a pulsating visual approach slope indicator that was put in to replace the VASI. However, there have been so many complaints from the pilots about it giving erroneous guidance that the system is turned off at night. The only instrument approachs to runway 26L are the nonprecision ASR radar approach and the NDB. The airport signage and markings are nonstandard and frequently nonexistent. There is for example no runway number on the runway and inadequate marking of the runway threshold. The runway 26L is not 10000 ft long for landing. The runway 26L is 5400 ft long with a 4500 ft displaced threshold. The reporter indicates there are many problems at this airport. There seems to be a lack of communication between the tower and the construction contractors. Therefore, the pilots do not have the information they need to safely operate into this airport. Several major carriers have terminated their operation with their medium large transport and larger aircraft. They use only the smaller commuters as a result of the union safety committees and the chief pilots looking at the airport and its deficiencies. The tower attempts to assign lndgs with tailwinds in excess of 10 KTS with the reduced runway length. Only after declaring the reporter had to go elsewhere was the tower convinced the airplanes needed to land into the wind.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE RPTR BACK TAXIING ON RWY 26L AT NIGHT RAN OFF THE USABLE PORTION OF THE RWY. THE RPTR FEELS THE ARPT MARKINGS, SIGNS AND LIGHTS ARE INADEQUATE. ALSO, THERE IS NO PRECISION APCH OR VERT GUIDANCE TO THE ARPT AT NIGHT. DURING THE DAY THERE IS A PULSATING VISUAL APCH SLOPE INDICATOR AND THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT THE SYS IS TURNED OFF AT NIGHT. THERE IS NO VASI.

Narrative: GRR RWY 26L UNDER CONSTRUCTION. 5400 FT AVAILABLE FOR LNDG. 4500 FT DISPLACED THRESHOLD. 5795 FT AVAILABLE FOR TKOF. NONSTANDARD SIGNAGE IN PLACE. WE WERE CLRED TO BACK TAXI ONTO RWY 26L TO TKOF. WHILE BACK TAXIING CAPT TAXIED OVER A 3 INCH LIP ONTO A NON LOAD-BEARING SURFACE. THIS AREA WAS NOT MARKED AND IT WAS DUSK. WE FEEL THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONES OR SOMETHING MARKING WHERE THE RWY ENDED AND THE CONSTRUCTION SURFACE BEGINS. IN ADDITION FOR THE APCH THERE IS A 25 FT SAND HILL YOU FLY OVER WITHIN 1000 FT OF TOUCHDOWN THAT IS NOT MARKED. ALSO THE ONE LIGHT PULSATING VASI WORKS ONLY SO, SO. IT IS SO BAD, UNRELIABLE THAT NOW THE CTL TWR TURNS IT OFF AT NIGHT. NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN FILED BY OUR AIRLINE AND NEW RESTRS ON GRR ARPT OPS COME OUT ON A DAILY BASIS. WITH IMPROPER SIGNAGE AND NO MARKINGS SHOWING THE DISPLACED THRESHOLD WITHOUT EVEN THE RWY NUMBERS PAINTED COULD MEAN A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS MISHAP AT THIS ARPT. WE WERE LUCKY, NO DAMAGE AND SLOW TAXI SPD. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED HE WAS COPLT ON A DC9-50. HE STATED THERE IS NO PRECISION APCH TO THE ARPT ALTHOUGH THERE IS AN ILS PUBLISHED, IT IS OTS. THERE IS NO VASI TO RWY 26L AS IS STATED IN THE ARPT FACILITIES DIRECTORY. THERE IS A PULSATING VISUAL APCH SLOPE INDICATOR THAT WAS PUT IN TO REPLACE THE VASI. HOWEVER, THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE PLTS ABOUT IT GIVING ERRONEOUS GUIDANCE THAT THE SYS IS TURNED OFF AT NIGHT. THE ONLY INST APCHS TO RWY 26L ARE THE NONPRECISION ASR RADAR APCH AND THE NDB. THE ARPT SIGNAGE AND MARKINGS ARE NONSTANDARD AND FREQUENTLY NONEXISTENT. THERE IS FOR EXAMPLE NO RWY NUMBER ON THE RWY AND INADEQUATE MARKING OF THE RWY THRESHOLD. THE RWY 26L IS NOT 10000 FT LONG FOR LNDG. THE RWY 26L IS 5400 FT LONG WITH A 4500 FT DISPLACED THRESHOLD. THE RPTR INDICATES THERE ARE MANY PROBS AT THIS ARPT. THERE SEEMS TO BE A LACK OF COM BTWN THE TWR AND THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS. THEREFORE, THE PLTS DO NOT HAVE THE INFO THEY NEED TO SAFELY OPERATE INTO THIS ARPT. SEVERAL MAJOR CARRIERS HAVE TERMINATED THEIR OP WITH THEIR MLG AND LARGER ACFT. THEY USE ONLY THE SMALLER COMMUTERS AS A RESULT OF THE UNION SAFETY COMMITTEES AND THE CHIEF PLTS LOOKING AT THE ARPT AND ITS DEFICIENCIES. THE TWR ATTEMPTS TO ASSIGN LNDGS WITH TAILWINDS IN EXCESS OF 10 KTS WITH THE REDUCED RWY LENGTH. ONLY AFTER DECLARING THE RPTR HAD TO GO ELSEWHERE WAS THE TWR CONVINCED THE AIRPLANES NEEDED TO LAND INTO THE WIND.

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.