|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : dro.airport|
|Altitude||agl single value : 0|
|Function||observation : observer|
|Experience||flight time total : 18000|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
|Airport||design : dro.airport|
This is to report a general and continuing safety hazard at the la plata county airport; durango; colorado (dro). The airport does not have a control tower. It has an ILS approach to runway 02 with standard category 1 minimums of '200 and 1/2.' in order for a departing aircraft to use the full length of runway 02 for takeoff; the pilots must back-taxi for approximately 1800 ft to reach a small turn-around area. This is required because of a lack of a full-length parallel taxiway. FAA airport design criteria require a full-length parallel taxiway for a runway that has an ILS. This is particularly important at an airport without a control tower. The FAA has failed for years to enforce its own safety criteria at dro. When the wind favors runway 02 and the visibility is restricted; especially in snow or blowing snow; an aircraft on short final would be unable to see a back-taxiing aircraft until it is too late. If all pilots properly participate in CTAF advisory communications the pilot on the ILS approach and any back-taxiing aircraft would probably be aware of each other. But; that is a high-risk assumption to make. Dro has scheduled commuter air carrier service so I presume it is a part 139-certified airport. That makes this situation even more inexcusable. We can only speculate about the risk this places on the crews and passenger of those commuter flts; not to mention private flight operations at the airport.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: RPTR ALLEGES THERE IS AN FAA ARPT DESIGN CRITERIA REQUIREMENT FOR A FULL-LENGTH PARALLEL TXWY FOR A RWY THAT HAS AN ILS APCH WHICH IS NOT BEING MET AT DRO.
Narrative: THIS IS TO REPORT A GENERAL AND CONTINUING SAFETY HAZARD AT THE LA PLATA COUNTY ARPT; DURANGO; COLORADO (DRO). THE ARPT DOES NOT HAVE A CTL TWR. IT HAS AN ILS APCH TO RWY 02 WITH STANDARD CATEGORY 1 MINIMUMS OF '200 AND 1/2.' IN ORDER FOR A DEPARTING ACFT TO USE THE FULL LENGTH OF RWY 02 FOR TKOF; THE PLTS MUST BACK-TAXI FOR APPROX 1800 FT TO REACH A SMALL TURN-AROUND AREA. THIS IS REQUIRED BECAUSE OF A LACK OF A FULL-LENGTH PARALLEL TXWY. FAA ARPT DESIGN CRITERIA REQUIRE A FULL-LENGTH PARALLEL TXWY FOR A RWY THAT HAS AN ILS. THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT AT AN ARPT WITHOUT A CTL TWR. THE FAA HAS FAILED FOR YEARS TO ENFORCE ITS OWN SAFETY CRITERIA AT DRO. WHEN THE WIND FAVORS RWY 02 AND THE VISIBILITY IS RESTRICTED; ESPECIALLY IN SNOW OR BLOWING SNOW; AN ACFT ON SHORT FINAL WOULD BE UNABLE TO SEE A BACK-TAXIING ACFT UNTIL IT IS TOO LATE. IF ALL PLTS PROPERLY PARTICIPATE IN CTAF ADVISORY COMMUNICATIONS THE PLT ON THE ILS APCH AND ANY BACK-TAXIING ACFT WOULD PROBABLY BE AWARE OF EACH OTHER. BUT; THAT IS A HIGH-RISK ASSUMPTION TO MAKE. DRO HAS SCHEDULED COMMUTER AIR CARRIER SERVICE SO I PRESUME IT IS A PART 139-CERTIFIED ARPT. THAT MAKES THIS SITUATION EVEN MORE INEXCUSABLE. WE CAN ONLY SPECULATE ABOUT THE RISK THIS PLACES ON THE CREWS AND PAX OF THOSE COMMUTER FLTS; NOT TO MENTION PRIVATE FLT OPERATIONS AT THE ARPT.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.