Narrative:

We were landing at ric. We requested runway 16 for landing due to runway length. I planned to turn off at the end, as runway 7/25 was notamed closed. 1/2 way through our landing rollout, at night, the tower asked us to turn off on the intercepting runway 25. We were still too fast to make that turn, and continued down to taxi speed somewhere around 1000-2000 ft remaining, planning to turn off at the end. As we slowed, the tower then said if we missed runway 25 we would have to make a 180 degree turn and back taxi to runway 25. I moved to the right and started a left 180 degree turn. When we were through about 90 degrees of turn, the tower then said they wanted us to do the turn at the 150 ft remaining point. They never did say why. They then said, 'oh, you are already in the turn, never mind.' the next morning, I was curious as to why the request to use 150 ft remaining point, so I called the tower. He said they had an aircraft slip off the side doing a 180 degree turn because the sides were not weight bearing. I asked the tower if they were fixing the problem and he said not that he knew of. Upon going over the paperwork again, we discovered hidden at the bottom of the ric field report a request to make 180 degree turns with 150 ft remaining on runway 16/34. This advisory should also be in company distribution and the ric NOTAMS. In addition, the tower should be telling aircraft prior to landing, not during rollout, to turn off at runway 25 or continue to the end for a 180 degree turn. This is too big of a gotcha. Also, are they fixing this problem, or does it just disappear after 2 months? Callback conversation with tower specialist revealed the following information: a tower specialist advised that construction of taxiway left was completed on nov/xa/98 and MD80 weight size aircraft, and larger, can now use taxiway left. All 'M' txwys are not capable of aircraft weight capabilities, MD80 and greater. So when taxiway left was being resurfaced, MD80 like-weight aircraft were required to make a 180 degree turn on the runway. The airport NOTAM requested aircraft to proceed down to the position of taxiway M3 or taxiway M, for their 180 degree turn, to give a little more room if they were unable to turn at runway 7/25. The specialist advised that the runway shoulders were not weight stressed for MD80 and above aircraft. The specialist advised that since taxiway left had opened, all taxiway problems have been resolved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80 FLC WAS REQUIRED TO MAKE A 180 DEG TURN ON RWY DUE TO ACFT WT RESTR AND CONSTRUCTION ON TXWYS. PIC CONCERNED WITH LIMITED NOTAM DISTRIBUTION.

Narrative: WE WERE LNDG AT RIC. WE REQUESTED RWY 16 FOR LNDG DUE TO RWY LENGTH. I PLANNED TO TURN OFF AT THE END, AS RWY 7/25 WAS NOTAMED CLOSED. 1/2 WAY THROUGH OUR LNDG ROLLOUT, AT NIGHT, THE TWR ASKED US TO TURN OFF ON THE INTERCEPTING RWY 25. WE WERE STILL TOO FAST TO MAKE THAT TURN, AND CONTINUED DOWN TO TAXI SPD SOMEWHERE AROUND 1000-2000 FT REMAINING, PLANNING TO TURN OFF AT THE END. AS WE SLOWED, THE TWR THEN SAID IF WE MISSED RWY 25 WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A 180 DEG TURN AND BACK TAXI TO RWY 25. I MOVED TO THE R AND STARTED A L 180 DEG TURN. WHEN WE WERE THROUGH ABOUT 90 DEGS OF TURN, THE TWR THEN SAID THEY WANTED US TO DO THE TURN AT THE 150 FT REMAINING POINT. THEY NEVER DID SAY WHY. THEY THEN SAID, 'OH, YOU ARE ALREADY IN THE TURN, NEVER MIND.' THE NEXT MORNING, I WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHY THE REQUEST TO USE 150 FT REMAINING POINT, SO I CALLED THE TWR. HE SAID THEY HAD AN ACFT SLIP OFF THE SIDE DOING A 180 DEG TURN BECAUSE THE SIDES WERE NOT WT BEARING. I ASKED THE TWR IF THEY WERE FIXING THE PROB AND HE SAID NOT THAT HE KNEW OF. UPON GOING OVER THE PAPERWORK AGAIN, WE DISCOVERED HIDDEN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE RIC FIELD RPT A REQUEST TO MAKE 180 DEG TURNS WITH 150 FT REMAINING ON RWY 16/34. THIS ADVISORY SHOULD ALSO BE IN COMPANY DISTRIBUTION AND THE RIC NOTAMS. IN ADDITION, THE TWR SHOULD BE TELLING ACFT PRIOR TO LNDG, NOT DURING ROLLOUT, TO TURN OFF AT RWY 25 OR CONTINUE TO THE END FOR A 180 DEG TURN. THIS IS TOO BIG OF A GOTCHA. ALSO, ARE THEY FIXING THIS PROB, OR DOES IT JUST DISAPPEAR AFTER 2 MONTHS? CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH TWR SPECIALIST REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: A TWR SPECIALIST ADVISED THAT CONSTRUCTION OF TXWY L WAS COMPLETED ON NOV/XA/98 AND MD80 WT SIZE ACFT, AND LARGER, CAN NOW USE TXWY L. ALL 'M' TXWYS ARE NOT CAPABLE OF ACFT WT CAPABILITIES, MD80 AND GREATER. SO WHEN TXWY L WAS BEING RESURFACED, MD80 LIKE-WT ACFT WERE REQUIRED TO MAKE A 180 DEG TURN ON THE RWY. THE ARPT NOTAM REQUESTED ACFT TO PROCEED DOWN TO THE POS OF TXWY M3 OR TXWY M, FOR THEIR 180 DEG TURN, TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE ROOM IF THEY WERE UNABLE TO TURN AT RWY 7/25. THE SPECIALIST ADVISED THAT THE RWY SHOULDERS WERE NOT WT STRESSED FOR MD80 AND ABOVE ACFT. THE SPECIALIST ADVISED THAT SINCE TXWY L HAD OPENED, ALL TXWY PROBS HAVE BEEN RESOLVED.

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.