Narrative:

I had just landed on runway 21R at spokane felts field and tower (class D airspace) cleared me to turn left at midfield, keep speed up, and taxi across runway 21L in front of a turbine helicopter practicing an autorotation to runway 21L sod runway. The wing of my cessna 150 blocked my view of the helicopter. I followed instructions, but I'd have liked more separation. After clearing runway 21L, I held for yet another turbine helicopter making an approach to the perimeter taxiway and ramp I was going to use. This helicopter approach was described by the tower as a 'circle the tower' traffic pattern. This particular ramp is frequently busy with pedestrians, aircraft, and vehicles. The tower has been relieved of responsibility for the ramp because of a lack of control of various users on the ramp. However, the tower does issue orders related to the ramp area. Several other comments come to mind. First, runways 21R-3L have two sets of hold lines. There is a set of hold lines for when ILS approachs are being made, and another set for visual conditions. I've seen this confuse pilots at felts in the past. I suggest eliminating the VMC hold lines and expanding the run-up areas away from the ILS hold lines. The ILS hold lines severely truncate the run-up area for runway 21R. Second, the sod runway at felts, available at pilot request, runs parallel between the left and right paved runways. Helicopters particularly use this sod runway, although helicopters sometimes also use the sod between runways 3R- 21L and the parallel taxiway. Should there be hold lines for the sod runway(south)? The apparently simple topic of 'runway taxiway incursions' has a lot of complications when you get down to details. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that the first hold line one comes to when taxiing to runway 21R is the ILS hold line and most pilots will not cross that line. This means the runup area is cut in half and leaves a limited area for runup. Reporter's suggestion is to increase the size of the area if that first hold line is kept. He would also like to see a limitation on using both the sod and the hard surface runway at the same time as the separation is very limited. There are plans to close the tower due to low traffic count even though there is great usage by medical helicopters and fixed wing and a great deal of turbine traffic for cargo operations. The option is there for the local municipality to establish a contract tower but little enthusiasm to pay for it. There is a problem with housing closing in on the airport with new developments and a ridge over which the traffic pattern runs and houses being built on top of it, so geographic factors are to be considered.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C150 LNDG IS CLRED TO TAXI ACROSS A PARALLEL RWY IN FRONT OF A TURBINE HELI PRACTICING AUTOROTATION ON THE SOD RWY BETWEEN RWY AND TXWY. HE IS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE CLRNC AND THE FACT THAT HE CANNOT SEE THE HELI DUE TO THE HIGH WING. ANOTHER HELI IS LNDG AND RPTR WAITS FOR THAT LNDG TOO, ALTHOUGH NOT TOLD BY TWR.

Narrative: I HAD JUST LANDED ON RWY 21R AT SPOKANE FELTS FIELD AND TWR (CLASS D AIRSPACE) CLRED ME TO TURN L AT MIDFIELD, KEEP SPD UP, AND TAXI ACROSS RWY 21L IN FRONT OF A TURBINE HELICOPTER PRACTICING AN AUTOROTATION TO RWY 21L SOD RWY. THE WING OF MY CESSNA 150 BLOCKED MY VIEW OF THE HELICOPTER. I FOLLOWED INSTRUCTIONS, BUT I'D HAVE LIKED MORE SEPARATION. AFTER CLRING RWY 21L, I HELD FOR YET ANOTHER TURBINE HELICOPTER MAKING AN APCH TO THE PERIMETER TXWY AND RAMP I WAS GOING TO USE. THIS HELICOPTER APCH WAS DESCRIBED BY THE TWR AS A 'CIRCLE THE TWR' TRAFFIC PATTERN. THIS PARTICULAR RAMP IS FREQUENTLY BUSY WITH PEDESTRIANS, ACFT, AND VEHICLES. THE TWR HAS BEEN RELIEVED OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE RAMP BECAUSE OF A LACK OF CTL OF VARIOUS USERS ON THE RAMP. HOWEVER, THE TWR DOES ISSUE ORDERS RELATED TO THE RAMP AREA. SEVERAL OTHER COMMENTS COME TO MIND. FIRST, RWYS 21R-3L HAVE TWO SETS OF HOLD LINES. THERE IS A SET OF HOLD LINES FOR WHEN ILS APCHS ARE BEING MADE, AND ANOTHER SET FOR VISUAL CONDITIONS. I'VE SEEN THIS CONFUSE PLTS AT FELTS IN THE PAST. I SUGGEST ELIMINATING THE VMC HOLD LINES AND EXPANDING THE RUN-UP AREAS AWAY FROM THE ILS HOLD LINES. THE ILS HOLD LINES SEVERELY TRUNCATE THE RUN-UP AREA FOR RWY 21R. SECOND, THE SOD RWY AT FELTS, AVAILABLE AT PLT REQUEST, RUNS PARALLEL BETWEEN THE L AND R PAVED RWYS. HELICOPTERS PARTICULARLY USE THIS SOD RWY, ALTHOUGH HELICOPTERS SOMETIMES ALSO USE THE SOD BETWEEN RWYS 3R- 21L AND THE PARALLEL TXWY. SHOULD THERE BE HOLD LINES FOR THE SOD RWY(S)? THE APPARENTLY SIMPLE TOPIC OF 'RWY TXWY INCURSIONS' HAS A LOT OF COMPLICATIONS WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO DETAILS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT THE FIRST HOLD LINE ONE COMES TO WHEN TAXIING TO RWY 21R IS THE ILS HOLD LINE AND MOST PLTS WILL NOT CROSS THAT LINE. THIS MEANS THE RUNUP AREA IS CUT IN HALF AND LEAVES A LIMITED AREA FOR RUNUP. RPTR'S SUGGESTION IS TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE AREA IF THAT FIRST HOLD LINE IS KEPT. HE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE A LIMITATION ON USING BOTH THE SOD AND THE HARD SURFACE RWY AT THE SAME TIME AS THE SEPARATION IS VERY LIMITED. THERE ARE PLANS TO CLOSE THE TWR DUE TO LOW TFC COUNT EVEN THOUGH THERE IS GREAT USAGE BY MEDICAL HELIS AND FIXED WING AND A GREAT DEAL OF TURBINE TFC FOR CARGO OPS. THE OPTION IS THERE FOR THE LCL MUNICIPALITY TO ESTABLISH A CONTRACT TWR BUT LITTLE ENTHUSIASM TO PAY FOR IT. THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH HOUSING CLOSING IN ON THE ARPT WITH NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND A RIDGE OVER WHICH THE TFC PATTERN RUNS AND HOUSES BEING BUILT ON TOP OF IT, SO GEOGRAPHIC FACTORS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED.

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.