Narrative:

Due to low ceilings and visibility at cmh, we had flown an automatic-coupled approach to runway 28L. I disconnected the autoplt at 200 ft AGL to make the landing (no automatic-land capability). From the threshold inbound, it became obvious that few, if any runway markings were visible and I attributed this to the fact that snow, ice and urea were on the runway. The runway lights were, however, quite visible and a normal crosswind landing was made. The next afternoon, we departed from the same runway (runway 28L) and I noticed that even though the runway was clear of all snow and ice and most urea, the runway centerline is effectively faded and obscured by patching to the point that it is indistinguishable from the runway itself. The low visibility takeoff minimums for this runway are 1/4 mi or 1600 ft RVR. I think it would be very challenging to use this runway centerline for 'adequate visual reference.' it's certainly not much use for night lndgs. The centerline needs to be repainted. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the touchdown markings are also faded and obscured. Pilot suggests that both ends of the runway in addition to the centerline need to be repainted.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B727 CREW OBSERVED THE RWY MARKINGS FOR RWY 28L AT CMH ARE NOT ABLE TO BE SEEN.

Narrative: DUE TO LOW CEILINGS AND VISIBILITY AT CMH, WE HAD FLOWN AN AUTO-COUPLED APCH TO RWY 28L. I DISCONNECTED THE AUTOPLT AT 200 FT AGL TO MAKE THE LNDG (NO AUTO-LAND CAPABILITY). FROM THE THRESHOLD INBOUND, IT BECAME OBVIOUS THAT FEW, IF ANY RWY MARKINGS WERE VISIBLE AND I ATTRIBUTED THIS TO THE FACT THAT SNOW, ICE AND UREA WERE ON THE RWY. THE RWY LIGHTS WERE, HOWEVER, QUITE VISIBLE AND A NORMAL XWIND LNDG WAS MADE. THE NEXT AFTERNOON, WE DEPARTED FROM THE SAME RWY (RWY 28L) AND I NOTICED THAT EVEN THOUGH THE RWY WAS CLR OF ALL SNOW AND ICE AND MOST UREA, THE RWY CTRLINE IS EFFECTIVELY FADED AND OBSCURED BY PATCHING TO THE POINT THAT IT IS INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE RWY ITSELF. THE LOW VISIBILITY TKOF MINIMUMS FOR THIS RWY ARE 1/4 MI OR 1600 FT RVR. I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY CHALLENGING TO USE THIS RWY CTRLINE FOR 'ADEQUATE VISUAL REFERENCE.' IT'S CERTAINLY NOT MUCH USE FOR NIGHT LNDGS. THE CTRLINE NEEDS TO BE REPAINTED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE TOUCHDOWN MARKINGS ARE ALSO FADED AND OBSCURED. PLT SUGGESTS THAT BOTH ENDS OF THE RWY IN ADDITION TO THE CTRLINE NEED TO BE REPAINTED.

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.