"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

There are "taxiways" and there are "taxiways".


So how do "taxiways" differ from "taxiways"?



What matters is how the
airport operator has defined the non-movement areas. You can easily see
that from the markings on the pavement, or of course you could ask the
controllers or other officials at the airport. Just because a person
might use the word "taxiway" to describe an area on the airport, that
doesn't mean it's subject to the regulation that was quoted.


Why not?



Regardless, there are examples of places where taxiways (that is, long
stretches of pavement on which aircraft are expected to taxi) are simply
not part of the movement area, and are not subject to the regulation that
was quoted.


How does the regulation that was quoted differentiate between those
taxiways?



If it were true that one could not operate an aircraft on a taxiway that
is within a non-movement area without an ATC clearance, then thousands of
pilots each day would be in violation of that regulation. I personally
don't believe that's the case, so through proof by contradiction, the
regulation doesn't apply to taxiways that are within a non-movement area.


If the posted speed limit is 70, but the state patrol doesn't issue speeding
citations for less than 75, is the speed limit then 75?



If someone has some compelling evidence to suggest that these thousands of
pilots ARE violating the regulation, and can explain how that could be and
yet the FAA doesn't seem interested in citing any of those pilots, that
might be an interesting topic. But I doubt such evidence will be
forthcoming.


They're violating the letter of the law, no evidence beyond that is needed.