4 ms·

I don't understand it either. Here in Seattle, SeaTac airport has a parallel taxiway (Taxiway Tango) with a long history of being mistaken for a runway. The li

I don't understand it either. Here in Seattle, SeaTac airport has a parallel taxiway (Taxiway Tango) with a long history of being mistaken for a runway. The list of things tried so far to resolve the issue is interesting: https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2015/12/31/tango-taxiway-a-history-of-mistaken-landings-and.html https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2015/12/31/tango-ta...

wmblaettler 8y ago
The very first thing I thought of upon reading your comment "The list of things tried so far to resolve the issue..." was "What about a big lighted 'x'?" then I clicked the link.
- jonah 8y ago
  I'd like to know why they removed it.
  - PhantomGremlin 8y ago
    Exactly my question. It's 9000+ feet long. Put a lighted red X on it every 1000 feet. Or, maybe Xes aren't the answer, but there must be some technique to produce a startling visual warning. It's probably a situation like Chesterton's fence. There are probably good reasons for not having the Xes. At least I hope so, I hope it's not just "that costs money and then we have to maintain it". The money can't be an issue. How much would 500 or 1000 deaths cost? How expensive are all the other proposals which have been mentioned? Those aren't cheap either.
  - wmblaettler 8y ago
    Indeed, the article does not give any reason for its removal, other than the fact that it was removed. My guess is that it was in disrepair and/or they deemed it ineffective since there were landings in the years preceding the removal.
nraynaud 8y ago
make them jagged? (I'm half serious, if they are that much dangerous, then sorry for the people taxiing). They could also be made falsely jagged at night with the lighting system.
- rocky1138 8y ago
  Who is to say that you won't now have planes coming down on a surface which constantly changes conditions, going from tarmac to grass and back again?
jrnichols 8y ago
a google search for "taxiway landing" shows that this has happened quite a few times - with full passenger loads in some cases.

wmblaettler 8y ago

The very first thing I thought of upon reading your comment "The list of things tried so far to resolve the issue..." was "What about a big lighted 'x'?" then I clicked the link.

jonah 8y ago
I'd like to know why they removed it.
- PhantomGremlin 8y ago
  Exactly my question. It's 9000+ feet long. Put a lighted red X on it every 1000 feet. Or, maybe Xes aren't the answer, but there must be some technique to produce a startling visual warning. It's probably a situation like Chesterton's fence. There are probably good reasons for not having the Xes. At least I hope so, I hope it's not just "that costs money and then we have to maintain it". The money can't be an issue. How much would 500 or 1000 deaths cost? How expensive are all the other proposals which have been mentioned? Those aren't cheap either.
- wmblaettler 8y ago
  Indeed, the article does not give any reason for its removal, other than the fact that it was removed. My guess is that it was in disrepair and/or they deemed it ineffective since there were landings in the years preceding the removal.

nraynaud 8y ago

make them jagged? (I'm half serious, if they are that much dangerous, then sorry for the people taxiing). They could also be made falsely jagged at night with the lighting system.

rocky1138 8y ago
Who is to say that you won't now have planes coming down on a surface which constantly changes conditions, going from tarmac to grass and back again?

jrnichols 8y ago

a google search for "taxiway landing" shows that this has happened quite a few times - with full passenger loads in some cases.