CRJ crash at KLEX:

"John Gaquin" wrote:


"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.

Which is what I said. You perhaps have mixed up who said what in this
thread.

"James Robinson" wrote in message

Which is what I said. You perhaps have mixed up who said what in this
thread.

Neither of my posts was a response to anything you said. Check the thread
sequence.

"John Gaquin" wrote:


"James Robinson" wrote in message

Which is what I said. You perhaps have mixed up who said what in
this thread.

Neither of my posts was a response to anything you said. Check the
thread sequence.

Here is a quote from your previous response:

James is correct. FAA diagram he

I think not. ...

Sure looks like you were responding to something I said.

"James Robinson" wrote in message

Here is a quote from your previous response:

James is correct. FAA diagram he

I think not. ...

Sure looks like you were responding to something I said.

sigh try to follow, now....

What you said was accurate in itself -- the diagram doesn't show the other
taxiway.

To which john smith added... "The diagram has not been updated to show the
newly added 600 foot ....."

To which I replied "...Quite the opposite, I think...." [because there
was no newly added, etc etc]

At which point Ron Bell said "...James is correct. FAA diagram he"
which clearly means, for those for whom interpretation is needed, "James is
correct for the reasons shown in the FAA diagram here", which, of course,
was inaccurate on Ron's part.

And I said "I think not..." You were correct because what you said was
accurate, but the diagram and photo don't demonstrate any new area at all.
Its the diagram and the photos and the notion of a newly added piece of
pavement that were being discussed.