Narrative:

On 10/X/90, I was working as an air traffic controller at the in-flight position at FSS at acv. At about XA21Z, air carrier X reported localizer inbound for landing at acv on an IFR flight plan. I issued an airport advisory to the aircraft and requested his position. The pilot advised that he was 9 mi southeast. At about XA25.43Z, small aircraft Y reported, 'ready for takeoff on 32, would like to make a left turning departure going south.' I issued an airport advisory, stating, 'acv advisory, wind 300 at 05, favored runway 32, altimeter 3013, traffic an air carrier X reported niner mi out about 3 mins, correction, 4 mins ago for landing.' at this point small aircraft Y proceeded to taxi onto runway 32. As the aircraft was rolling, air carrier X advised, 'air carrier X short final 32.' as air carrier X was speaking, I had just looked onto my contact sheet to indicate for airport advisory issued. When air carrier X called, I realized that there may be a conflict, and spotted air carrier X over the approach lights at about 100' AGL, and 500' from the threshold of the runway. Small aircraft Y was taxiing onto the runway approaching the first set of T/D zone markings at the threshold of runway 32. I immediately advised small aircraft Y of landing traffic. Small aircraft Y stopped on the first stripe of the marking as the airborne aircraft flew by about 25' AGL and along the centerline of the runway. The pilot of small aircraft Y responded, 'you cleared me for takeoff!' my response was, 'small aircraft Y, no tower in operation.' small aircraft Y then executed a 360 degree turn on the runway. The pilot of small aircraft should have made a traffic check, regardless of whether there was a tower or not, and yielded to landed traffic. Even if he had been cleared for takeoff, he should not have taxied onto the runway if he had seen the other aircraft or, at least, should have heeded the pilot's warning that he was on short final. On the other hand, the pilot of air carrier X had an obligation, even though he had the right of way, to avoid placing his aircraft into a position of constituting a collision hazard. Possibly, I might have been able to avoid this situation had I analyzed the pilot's initial call-up, and issued the information that there was 'no control tower in operation.'

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DEP SMA BEGINS TO TAXI ONTO THE RWY AT NON TWR ARPT WITH ANOTHER ACFT ON SHORT FINAL.

Narrative: ON 10/X/90, I WAS WORKING AS AN AIR TFC CTLR AT THE INFLT POS AT FSS AT ACV. AT ABOUT XA21Z, ACR X RPTED LOC INBND FOR LNDG AT ACV ON AN IFR FLT PLAN. I ISSUED AN ARPT ADVISORY TO THE ACFT AND REQUESTED HIS POS. THE PLT ADVISED THAT HE WAS 9 MI SE. AT ABOUT XA25.43Z, SMA Y RPTED, 'READY FOR TKOF ON 32, WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A LEFT TURNING DEP GOING S.' I ISSUED AN ARPT ADVISORY, STATING, 'ACV ADVISORY, WIND 300 AT 05, FAVORED RWY 32, ALTIMETER 3013, TFC AN ACR X RPTED NINER MI OUT ABOUT 3 MINS, CORRECTION, 4 MINS AGO FOR LNDG.' AT THIS POINT SMA Y PROCEEDED TO TAXI ONTO RWY 32. AS THE ACFT WAS ROLLING, ACR X ADVISED, 'ACR X SHORT FINAL 32.' AS ACR X WAS SPEAKING, I HAD JUST LOOKED ONTO MY CONTACT SHEET TO INDICATE FOR ARPT ADVISORY ISSUED. WHEN ACR X CALLED, I REALIZED THAT THERE MAY BE A CONFLICT, AND SPOTTED ACR X OVER THE APCH LIGHTS AT ABOUT 100' AGL, AND 500' FROM THE THRESHOLD OF THE RWY. SMA Y WAS TAXIING ONTO THE RWY APCHING THE FIRST SET OF T/D ZONE MARKINGS AT THE THRESHOLD OF RWY 32. I IMMEDIATELY ADVISED SMA Y OF LNDG TFC. SMA Y STOPPED ON THE FIRST STRIPE OF THE MARKING AS THE AIRBORNE ACFT FLEW BY ABOUT 25' AGL AND ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF THE RWY. THE PLT OF SMA Y RESPONDED, 'YOU CLRED ME FOR TKOF!' MY RESPONSE WAS, 'SMA Y, NO TWR IN OPERATION.' SMA Y THEN EXECUTED A 360 DEG TURN ON THE RWY. THE PLT OF SMA SHOULD HAVE MADE A TFC CHK, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE WAS A TWR OR NOT, AND YIELDED TO LANDED TFC. EVEN IF HE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR TKOF, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE TAXIED ONTO THE RWY IF HE HAD SEEN THE OTHER ACFT OR, AT LEAST, SHOULD HAVE HEEDED THE PLT'S WARNING THAT HE WAS ON SHORT FINAL. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE PLT OF ACR X HAD AN OBLIGATION, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD THE RIGHT OF WAY, TO AVOID PLACING HIS ACFT INTO A POS OF CONSTITUTING A COLLISION HAZARD. POSSIBLY, I MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO AVOID THIS SITUATION HAD I ANALYZED THE PLT'S INITIAL CALL-UP, AND ISSUED THE INFO THAT THERE WAS 'NO CTL TWR IN OPERATION.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.