Changing Airport Signage After Runway Number Change

Fearless Tower

Fearless Tower

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
16,718
Location
Norfolk, VA
Display Name
Fearless Tower
Home Airfield
KORF
So….is there an FAA standard for changing the runway signage after the runway number is changed?

I was at Mesquite (HQZ) last week and getting ready to depart runway 18 and noticed the sign still showed it as 17. Thing is, I noticed this when I was departing HQZ a year ago. How long does it take to change a freakin' sign?
 
This is the FAA after all.

Airport also has some responsibility. No excuse for taking this long. Someone dropped the ball.
 
From my understanding and from what I've seen at a large international airport is if the runway's designation is changed at 12:01am on a given day, every sign and painted references will all be changed for the 12:01 opening. I don't know what the regulation would be that drives that but it's always been simultaneous from what I've seen. Seems someone dropped the ball. FAA maybe for not verifying but the owner of the airport (city?) for certain.
 
Fearless Tower said:
So….is there an FAA standard for changing the runway signage after the runway number is changed?

I was at Mesquite (HQZ) last week and getting ready to depart runway 18 and noticed the sign still showed it as 17. Thing is, I noticed this when I was departing HQZ a year ago. How long does it take to change a freakin' sign?
Click to expand...

Maybe you took off on the wrong runway! 17 instead of 18 lol.

I kid!
 
At Dulles a decade ago they decided to rename the perfectly sensible taxiway nomenclature with the FAA standard insanity. To couple this confusion, they went around and covered up all the taxiway signs, so you had no clue what either the OLD or the NEW taxiway you were on or approaching was. I had both of the Jepp taxi charts (they have a large fold out one for IAD). It was confusing as hell. At least they could have staved off using the new nomenclature until they had the signs in place. ATC just resorted to giving out progressives to everybody for a couple of days.

At Oshkosh each year it takes them about a couple of hours to go replace all the signs (What is normally 18-36 becomes 18R-36L and most of what is taxiway A becomes 18R-36L).
 
Looking at the airport, you'd expect an airport manager of an airport of that size to be more on top of things than that. But, I've seen some non-towered airports go a long time without changing the signs. I'm convinced at the non-towered airports the city will wait to change them until the pilots finally quit calling the wrong runway...
 
mondtster said:
Looking at the airport, you'd expect an airport manager of an airport of that size to be more on top of things than that. But, I've seen some non-towered airports go a long time without changing the signs. I'm convinced at the non-towered airports the city will wait to change them until the pilots finally quit calling the wrong runway...
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is what surprised me the most. HQZ is a Class D.
 
GLMS_NC said:
This is the FAA after all.

Airport also has some responsibility. No excuse for taking this long. Someone dropped the ball.
Click to expand...
The airport has all the responsibility for changing the signage.
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
So….is there an FAA standard for changing the runway signage after the runway number is changed?

I was at Mesquite (HQZ) last week and getting ready to depart runway 18 and noticed the sign still showed it as 17. Thing is, I noticed this when I was departing HQZ a year ago. How long does it take to change a freakin' sign?
Click to expand...
When I saw the thread title I immediately thought of Mesquite. Was leaving there about a year ago. Cleared to taxi to 36. When I got to "35" I figured I must have misheard, so announced I was holding at 35. The controller almost sounded angry when he cleared me to take off on 3.6. I guess it's a sore subject.
 
Aw c'mon, lots of highways have historical markers - why not runways, taxiways?
These old signs pay homage to the rich history of the airport's yesteryear; have a little respect!
 
kkoran said:
The airport has all the responsibility for changing the signage.
Click to expand...

For getting it done - yes. But that is the easy part. The airport may be ready but are held up by state DOT or the FAA. I am on the board for my airport and we are routinely ready faster and held up due to others. But we get the blame for the delays.
 
Lindberg said:
When I saw the thread title I immediately thought of Mesquite. Was leaving there about a year ago. Cleared to taxi to 36. When I got to "35" I figured I must have misheard, so announced I was holding at 35. The controller almost sounded angry when he cleared me to take off on 3.6. I guess it's a sore subject.
Click to expand...

Tell him "the big sign says 3-5, I can't see the numbers on the runway yet."
 
The reality is when a runway gets its number changed (almost always by 1 number up or down), it goes by BOTH the old and new number for a while. Its not really an issue. If someone calls runway 34, runway 35 instead, you know which runway he means right? Worry about something else, this one isnt worth the trouble.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Aw c'mon, lots of highways have historical markers - why not runways, taxiways?
These old signs pay homage to the rich history of the airport's yesteryear; have a little respect!
Click to expand...

KSAV even has a couple of graves in the middle of the runway.
 
Just a wild guess, you haven't volunteered to get out there with a sandblaster and paintbrush. Airports are grossly underfunded and lack volunteer effort.

Giva a $5000 check to the airport manager, that might just cover the expense.
 
coloradobluesky said:
The reality is when a runway gets its number changed (almost always by 1 number up or down), it goes by BOTH the old and new number for a while. Its not really an issue. If someone calls runway 34, runway 35 instead, you know which runway he means right? Worry about something else, this one isnt worth the trouble.
Click to expand...
I think most of us would agree, but at a towered airport, they shouldn't act like you're offending them when you call the wrong runway number when taking off. As others here said, I immediately thought of Mesquite when I saw the subject of this thread. They changed the numbers painted on the runways, but the signs are wrong. I've heard the controllers there get angry when someone says they're ready at 17. "Are you ready at 18?" How can you be mad when the runway sign tells you you're about to enter 17?!

kgruber said:
Just a wild guess, you haven't volunteered to get out there with a sandblaster and paintbrush. Airports are grossly underfunded and lack volunteer effort.
Click to expand...
At Mesquite, a sandblaster and paintbrush probably wouldn't help much since the runway is painted correctly, but the signs are wrong! I'm also pretty sure they're not underfunded and even if you volunteered, they wouldn't let you go out there.
 
coloradobluesky said:
The reality is when a runway gets its number changed (almost always by 1 number up or down), it goes by BOTH the old and new number for a while. Its not really an issue. If someone calls runway 34, runway 35 instead, you know which runway he means right? Worry about something else, this one isnt worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

How would that work at an airport like LAX? If there was a change there and both the old numbers and new numbers were used, the new number of one set would be the same as the old number of the other set. That would be rather confusing and unsettling. It would need to be a hard switchover.
 
I think the signs should match the runway, but at a non-towered airport, there's probably not a 17 and a 18 runway, so if you call either I'm assuming you're landing to the South and that's close enough. I have to laugh when someone coming into our airport (we have 17-35) calls they're landing on 18 and some smartass has to say, "Are you sure about that?" Seems like I hear something similar once a month or so. We know they're landing on 17, not worth the extra radio call.

The best one was the other day when some called they were landing on 17 and someone quickly said you might want to land on 18 since they don't have a 17. The first pilot replied, maybe you should stop giving advice... the runway is 17. Had to laugh at that one!
 
kgruber said:
Just a wild guess, you haven't volunteered to get out there with a sandblaster and paintbrush. Airports are grossly underfunded and lack volunteer effort.

Giva a $5000 check to the airport manager, that might just cover the expense.
Click to expand...

I didn't blast off the old numbers, but I did repaint them once when I couldn't see them in a night landing. The runway lights were 200' wide, the asphalt was 75' wide and well off-center, enough for taildraggers to land in the grass beside the runway and inside the lights (where it was mowed). Painted "26" at one end and "8" with a line and only one displaced threshold arrow, took 11 gallons . . . The other two arrows would probably have been another gallon each.

Never realized just how big those numbers were before. But I did get to check the acceleration of my plane, as I knew where I generally lifted off at 70 mph, and the car, foot to the floor and speed-shifting as I approached redline, didn't even come close!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top