Narrative:

Flew into uin IFR and ATC released me for a visual when I broke out about 3000 ft. Tried to contact tower on 135.25 as shown on the approach plate. No response. Knowing that the tower is not always in operation from having been there a yr before, I stated my intentions on the tower frequency. (My mind set here is that if a tower is closed -- as per our jln -- you use the tower frequency to state your landing and takeoff intentions. This, obviously, turned out to be my serious mistake.) the approach plate does give the CTAF after the unicom information. My eyes didn't go down that far on the radio frequencys. The tower frequency is followed by an asterisk which implied to me that the tower was not open all the time. I had the current airport facility directory with me but did not check it because my mind set was that I should use the tower frequency as the CTAF. I landed without incident, fueled, asked the folks when the tower was open and they said it hadn't been open since last summer. It still didn't ring a bell for me to ask what frequency they were using. My mind set was there. I had landed on runway 18 since there was a little wind out of the south. I elected to take off on runway 13 since a left turn out would position me correctly for my departure. I also elected to continue the trip VFR. As I taxied out I again stated my intentions on the tower frequency and did the same when I was ready to take off on runway 13. I could not see the end of runway 18 nor did I hear any communications on the tower frequency. I lifted off before runway 13 intersected with runway 18 and was 100 ft or 200 ft above the ground when I saw a twin engine airplane rolling out on runway 18. It was startling because I did not see nor hear the twin who was coming in on an instrument flight plan which I learned later. When I arrived at my destination, ues, I was asked to contact the kansas city watch supervisor. I did this and we discussed the situation. This was the first time that the CTAF frequency of 123.00 became apparent to me. This situation could have been avoided if I had used the airport facility directory, the VFR chart that I was carrying, or read the IFR plate more carefully. Perhaps removing the tower and ground frequency from the plate would help. Then when they need it they could NOTAM it for the time it is needed which appears to be infrequently. I realize that uin had a serious collision not too long ago which I understand may have resulted from a communications foul up. I wonder if I was in a similar situation. From now on I know the term CTAF will mean a lot more to me and I will not get a preconceived mind set in place. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states he has heard nothing further regarding the incident. His conversation with the FBO revealed that the tower was a national guard operation. He does not know if the national guard will even be back again or if there is any move to reactivate the tower. Reporter feels strongly that the information needs to be changed on the IFR chart to avoid confusion. He also noted that the sectional chart still, after 1 yr, shows the airport as tower controled with tower frequency still listed. He feels it is very unsafe. Aircraft is C172.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PLT ON IFR FLT PLAN USES TWR FREQ VERSUS UNICOM FREQ ON APCH. TWR HAS BEEN CLOSED FOR ABOUT 1 YR. FREQ IS STILL LISTED ON THE APCH PLATE. ON DEP, STILL USING TWR FREQ, HE SIGHTS AN ACFT ON ROLLOUT ON AN INTERSECTING RWY WHEN HE IS ABOUT 200 FT AGL.

Narrative: FLEW INTO UIN IFR AND ATC RELEASED ME FOR A VISUAL WHEN I BROKE OUT ABOUT 3000 FT. TRIED TO CONTACT TWR ON 135.25 AS SHOWN ON THE APCH PLATE. NO RESPONSE. KNOWING THAT THE TWR IS NOT ALWAYS IN OP FROM HAVING BEEN THERE A YR BEFORE, I STATED MY INTENTIONS ON THE TWR FREQ. (MY MIND SET HERE IS THAT IF A TWR IS CLOSED -- AS PER OUR JLN -- YOU USE THE TWR FREQ TO STATE YOUR LNDG AND TKOF INTENTIONS. THIS, OBVIOUSLY, TURNED OUT TO BE MY SERIOUS MISTAKE.) THE APCH PLATE DOES GIVE THE CTAF AFTER THE UNICOM INFO. MY EYES DIDN'T GO DOWN THAT FAR ON THE RADIO FREQS. THE TWR FREQ IS FOLLOWED BY AN ASTERISK WHICH IMPLIED TO ME THAT THE TWR WAS NOT OPEN ALL THE TIME. I HAD THE CURRENT ARPT FACILITY DIRECTORY WITH ME BUT DID NOT CHK IT BECAUSE MY MIND SET WAS THAT I SHOULD USE THE TWR FREQ AS THE CTAF. I LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT, FUELED, ASKED THE FOLKS WHEN THE TWR WAS OPEN AND THEY SAID IT HADN'T BEEN OPEN SINCE LAST SUMMER. IT STILL DIDN'T RING A BELL FOR ME TO ASK WHAT FREQ THEY WERE USING. MY MIND SET WAS THERE. I HAD LANDED ON RWY 18 SINCE THERE WAS A LITTLE WIND OUT OF THE S. I ELECTED TO TAKE OFF ON RWY 13 SINCE A L TURN OUT WOULD POS ME CORRECTLY FOR MY DEP. I ALSO ELECTED TO CONTINUE THE TRIP VFR. AS I TAXIED OUT I AGAIN STATED MY INTENTIONS ON THE TWR FREQ AND DID THE SAME WHEN I WAS READY TO TAKE OFF ON RWY 13. I COULD NOT SEE THE END OF RWY 18 NOR DID I HEAR ANY COMS ON THE TWR FREQ. I LIFTED OFF BEFORE RWY 13 INTERSECTED WITH RWY 18 AND WAS 100 FT OR 200 FT ABOVE THE GND WHEN I SAW A TWIN ENG AIRPLANE ROLLING OUT ON RWY 18. IT WAS STARTLING BECAUSE I DID NOT SEE NOR HEAR THE TWIN WHO WAS COMING IN ON AN INST FLT PLAN WHICH I LEARNED LATER. WHEN I ARRIVED AT MY DEST, UES, I WAS ASKED TO CONTACT THE KANSAS CITY WATCH SUPVR. I DID THIS AND WE DISCUSSED THE SIT. THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE CTAF FREQ OF 123.00 BECAME APPARENT TO ME. THIS SIT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF I HAD USED THE ARPT FACILITY DIRECTORY, THE VFR CHART THAT I WAS CARRYING, OR READ THE IFR PLATE MORE CAREFULLY. PERHAPS REMOVING THE TWR AND GND FREQ FROM THE PLATE WOULD HELP. THEN WHEN THEY NEED IT THEY COULD NOTAM IT FOR THE TIME IT IS NEEDED WHICH APPEARS TO BE INFREQUENTLY. I REALIZE THAT UIN HAD A SERIOUS COLLISION NOT TOO LONG AGO WHICH I UNDERSTAND MAY HAVE RESULTED FROM A COMS FOUL UP. I WONDER IF I WAS IN A SIMILAR SIT. FROM NOW ON I KNOW THE TERM CTAF WILL MEAN A LOT MORE TO ME AND I WILL NOT GET A PRECONCEIVED MIND SET IN PLACE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HE HAS HEARD NOTHING FURTHER REGARDING THE INCIDENT. HIS CONVERSATION WITH THE FBO REVEALED THAT THE TWR WAS A NATIONAL GUARD OP. HE DOES NOT KNOW IF THE NATIONAL GUARD WILL EVEN BE BACK AGAIN OR IF THERE IS ANY MOVE TO REACTIVATE THE TWR. RPTR FEELS STRONGLY THAT THE INFO NEEDS TO BE CHANGED ON THE IFR CHART TO AVOID CONFUSION. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE SECTIONAL CHART STILL, AFTER 1 YR, SHOWS THE ARPT AS TWR CTLED WITH TWR FREQ STILL LISTED. HE FEELS IT IS VERY UNSAFE. ACFT IS C172.

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.