CRJ crash at KLEX:

"Aluckyguess" wrote:

Looking at that diagram I see how easy it would of been to do what they did.
WOW
Here's a diagram dated 08/03/2006:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

Don't agree with you Barry. They should have seen that you taxi
rightish from the terminal past Rwy 26 then either one (apparently
from pics) of two taxiways to Rwy 22. Even I can do that.

Ron Lee

Ron Lee wrote:
"Aluckyguess" wrote:

Looking at that diagram I see how easy it would of been to do what they did.
WOW
Here's a diagram dated 08/03/2006:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

Don't agree with you Barry.

I never said that. A top poster did, and I was misquoted.

(Ron Lee) wrote:

"Aluckyguess" wrote:

Looking at that diagram I see how easy it would of been to do what
they did. WOW


Here's a diagram dated 08/03/2006:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

Don't agree with you Barry. They should have seen that you taxi
rightish from the terminal past Rwy 26 then either one (apparently
from pics) of two taxiways to Rwy 22. Even I can do that.

The diagram doesn't show the additional taxiway that is apparent in the
photographs

News reports quote another pilot as saying that old right-hand taxiway had
a recently-erected barrier across it. He said it was a complete surprise
when he came across it the first time.

In article ,
James Robinson wrote:

(Ron Lee) wrote:

"Aluckyguess" wrote:

Looking at that diagram I see how easy it would of been to do what
they did. WOW


Here's a diagram dated 08/03/2006:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

Don't agree with you Barry. They should have seen that you taxi
rightish from the terminal past Rwy 26 then either one (apparently
from pics) of two taxiways to Rwy 22. Even I can do that.

The diagram doesn't show the additional taxiway that is apparent in the
photographs

News reports quote another pilot as saying that old right-hand taxiway had
a recently-erected barrier across it. He said it was a complete surprise
when he came across it the first time.

The diagram has not been updated to show the newly added 600 foot
extension and connecting taxiway.

"john smith" wrote in message news:jsmith-

The diagram has not been updated to show the newly added 600 foot
extension and connecting taxiway.

Quite the opposite, I think.

"John Gaquin" wrote:


"john smith" wrote in message news:jsmith-

The diagram has not been updated to show the newly added 600 foot
extension and connecting taxiway.

Quite the opposite, I think.

James is correct. FAA diagram he

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

Current aerial shot showing the new extension and taxiway is he

http://www.wcpo.com/specials/2006/5191/

Scroll through "The photos"

Ron Lee

In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

James is correct. FAA diagram he

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

This diagram does not show the extension.
Look at Google Earth and the angle that the taxiway makes with the
runway 22 approach end. The 90-degree intersection is south of the
threshhold.

john smith wrote:

In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

James is correct. FAA diagram he

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

This diagram does not show the extension.
Look at Google Earth and the angle that the taxiway makes with the
runway 22 approach end. The 90-degree intersection is south of the
threshhold.

John, James wrote "The diagram doesn't show the additional taxiway
that is apparent in the photographs."

My post confirmed his statement. Please look at the info that has
been provided.

Ron Lee

"john smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

James is correct. FAA diagram he

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF

This diagram does not show the extension.
Look at Google Earth and the angle that the taxiway makes with the
runway 22 approach end. The 90-degree intersection is south of the
threshhold.

Google Earth photos of KLEX date from 2003...

Jay B

"Ron Lee" wrote in message

James is correct. FAA diagram he

I think not. The google aerial photos are the older reference, taken some
3-4 years ago. My interpretation is this: Since that time, the threshold
of Rwy 22 has been displaced some 600 ft SW, leaving what appears to be
designated as an overrun for Rwy 04. It appears the taxiway leading to it
from the end of Rwy 22 has been closed. The fed taxi chart appears to only
sow those areas of pavement open for use. I can't vouch for the
administrative points, but the photos and diagrams bear out my theory.