Narrative:

Initially I was told to hold short of taxiway for the runway (unspecified). I had landed on runway 25 10 mins prior to incident and the wind was from 200 degrees at 8 KTS. Traffic called on a 4 mi final (runway unspecified). I then contacted golden rock and told them I could take an immediate takeoff (runway unspecified), but assuming runway 25. Traffic was not in sight and tower cleared me for an immediate takeoff (runway unspecified). I taxied onto runway 25 and immediately added takeoff power only to notice an light transport on a short final for runway 7. The light transport went around followed by unnecessary xmissions on the frequency. I took off from runway 7 with no further incident. The runway at golden rock is 8000 plus ft long with only 1 taxiway available near the end of runway 7. The small transport X needs over 2000 ft for takeoff and an intersection takeoff for runway 7 is impossible for this aircraft because of 700 ft uphill of runway available. This problem could have easily been avoided if all parties involved, the light transport, myself, and especially the controller, specified which runway was intended and in the controller's case, active. My lesson learned is never to assume.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT X OPPOSITE DIRECTION TKOF CAUSE LTT GAR. EVASIVE ACTION TAKEN.

Narrative: INITIALLY I WAS TOLD TO HOLD SHORT OF TXWY FOR THE RWY (UNSPECIFIED). I HAD LANDED ON RWY 25 10 MINS PRIOR TO INCIDENT AND THE WIND WAS FROM 200 DEGS AT 8 KTS. TFC CALLED ON A 4 MI FINAL (RWY UNSPECIFIED). I THEN CONTACTED GOLDEN ROCK AND TOLD THEM I COULD TAKE AN IMMEDIATE TKOF (RWY UNSPECIFIED), BUT ASSUMING RWY 25. TFC WAS NOT IN SIGHT AND TWR CLRED ME FOR AN IMMEDIATE TKOF (RWY UNSPECIFIED). I TAXIED ONTO RWY 25 AND IMMEDIATELY ADDED TKOF PWR ONLY TO NOTICE AN LTT ON A SHORT FINAL FOR RWY 7. THE LTT WENT AROUND FOLLOWED BY UNNECESSARY XMISSIONS ON THE FREQ. I TOOK OFF FROM RWY 7 WITH NO FURTHER INCIDENT. THE RWY AT GOLDEN ROCK IS 8000 PLUS FT LONG WITH ONLY 1 TXWY AVAILABLE NEAR THE END OF RWY 7. THE SMT X NEEDS OVER 2000 FT FOR TKOF AND AN INTXN TKOF FOR RWY 7 IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THIS ACFT BECAUSE OF 700 FT UPHILL OF RWY AVAILABLE. THIS PROB COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN AVOIDED IF ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, THE LTT, MYSELF, AND ESPECIALLY THE CTLR, SPECIFIED WHICH RWY WAS INTENDED AND IN THE CTLR'S CASE, ACTIVE. MY LESSON LEARNED IS NEVER TO ASSUME.

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.