Reduced taxiway NOTAM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Wrong side
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reduced taxiway NOTAM
Hello everybody, recently during an upgrade assessment,a friend of mine has been asked what he would like to do if, with the A320, you have to go in a destination where there is taxiway with adequate width, but there is a NOTAM with a reduction of taxiway at 30 meters.
According to the examiner he can dispatch the flight, but I have not found references to support this decision.
Does anyone know whrere the references are, please?
According to the examiner he can dispatch the flight, but I have not found references to support this decision.
Does anyone know whrere the references are, please?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only the width is limited to 30m i fail to see the problem. If the maximum allowable wing span for that taxiway has been limited then there is a problem.
Keep in mind, an A320 can take off and land on a 30m wide runway if the pilot is narrow runway qualified, therefore it should be easy enough to taxi on 30m wide rumways.
Keep in mind, an A320 can take off and land on a 30m wide runway if the pilot is narrow runway qualified, therefore it should be easy enough to taxi on 30m wide rumways.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Wrong side
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only the width is limited to 30m i fail to see the problem. If the maximum allowable wing span for that taxiway has been limited then there is a problem.
Keep in mind, an A320 can take off and land on a 30m wide runway if the pilot is narrow runway qualified, therefore it should be easy enough to taxi on 30m wide rumways.
Keep in mind, an A320 can take off and land on a 30m wide runway if the pilot is narrow runway qualified, therefore it should be easy enough to taxi on 30m wide rumways.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, in that case the taxiway would be unusable, as long as there is an alternative way to get around that it would still be possible. But if the taxiway has to be used and is limited to a wingspan of 30m i would consider the airfield as being closed. But again, now it depends in specifics like what part of the taxiway is limited during which times, alternative taxi routes and/or ops procedures etc. Planning to use a 34,1m / 35,8m wingspan on a taxiway that is limited to 30m is obviously not a wise choice.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Wrong side
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, in that case the taxiway would be unusable, as long as there is an alternative way to get around that it would still be possible. But if the taxiway has to be used and is limited to a wingspan of 30m i would consider the airfield as being closed. But again, now it depends in specifics like what part of the taxiway is limited during which times, alternative taxi routes and/or ops procedures etc. Planning to use a 34,1m / 35,8m wingspan on a taxiway that is limited to 30m is obviously not a wise choice.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(google it and free download available)
Table 1-4. Minimum separation distances between taxiways and between taxiways and objects (dimensions in metres).
The scenario proposed above does not make much sense to me; if a taxiway has WIP its code will be downgraded by NOTAM (i.e. CODE E downgrade to code C). If further WIP then the NOTAM/Chart NOTAMS must direct on the local procedure to be followed, otherwise it is not legal to come up with a homemade solution of calling a wingman when engaging a taxiway that becomes unsuitable for your category of aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had that in a previous airline where at one of our hubs the A330s needed a follow me on the main taxiway. One captain thought the marshaller was responsible and discovered that was not the case when exactly following that car slightly off the centerline, which sadly caused his winglet to push the tail of a company A321 around.
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Around latitude 0
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi ! Both annexe 14 (8th edition) & DOC 9157 part 2 (5th edition) shows tables of minimum taxiway width function of OMGWS Outer main gear wheel span, I fly 737NG with a OMGWS above 6 m which gives us a minimum taxiway width (in straight line) of 15 m. I guess the A 320 has almost the same dimensions as the -800 , flight can be dispatched regarding the NOTAM unless your OM PART A says otherwise.
