Does a runway holding position need enhanced centre line markings?

Here is a question I have been asked in training more than once, and I do not think the standard answers it cleanly.

If one runway holding position at your aerodrome has enhanced taxiway centre line markings, then they should be applied consistently at the others. That much is settled. But what happens when the holding position is painted on a runway — where one runway crosses another, and the crossing runway is being used as a taxi route?

Three possible answers, none of them comfortable

• Offset the enhanced markings from the runway centre line.
• Superimpose them over the runway centre line.
• Interrupt the runway centre line marking to accommodate them.

Each of those creates a problem. Annex 14 is specific about what may interrupt runway markings, and the answer is essentially the runway side stripe — not an arbitrary set of yellow dashes. Superimposing yellow taxiway markings on a landing surface is a hard thing to defend to a crew on short final.

Where I have landed

The strongest counter-argument I have had put to me — and I think it is correct — is that the enhanced taxiway centre line marking is specified for a taxiway/runway intersection, not a runway/runway intersection, with the pattern and spacing set out in the Annex figure. If that is right, the question dissolves: it does not belong on the runway at all.

But that leaves the real safety problem untouched, which is that a secondary runway used as a taxi route still has a holding position on it that a crew needs to see and stop at. If the standard denies you the most conspicuous tool available, the answer is an aeronautical study and a conversation with your regulator — not paint applied on instinct.

If your aerodrome has this geometry, consider your options for ground lighting appropriate to a runway holding position, even on a runway!