Narrative:

Just prior to beginning the descent into the denver area, my first officer obtained the ATIS for den. The ATIS was the XX00Z information stating an overcast layer at 2600 ft, visibility 10 SM, wind 110 degrees 5 KTS, altimeter 3049, temperature 17, dewpoint 15. With this information I briefed a visual approach to runway 17R stating that it would be backed up by the ILS for that runway. I briefed the approach per SOP, including all of the required information on the approach plate, but expecting to break out and complete the approach visually. I did not intend to use the autoplt or the flight director as is required by SOP if the WX is below a certain standard. A special to the ATIS was issued at XX39Z and none of the approach controllers nor the tower controller advised anyone on the frequency of this significant change in the ceiling. The new ATIS stated a broken layer at 800 ft, broken at 1400 ft, and overcast at 1900 ft. Remarks said ceilings variable at 600-1000 ft. The visibility was given as 10 SM and winds 08 degrees 10 KTS. We were vectored to the final approach course and instructed to call the tower over joule and also requested to do 190 KTS to the marker, which is only 4.5 mi from the end of the runway. They were requesting this speed of every aircraft on the approach. The first officer contacted the tower controller at joule and we were cleared to land. Nothing was said about a departure prior to our arrival. We broke out of the overcast layer at approximately 550 ft. I could see the first half of the runway when I glanced outside the first time, although the visibility did not appear to be 10 SM. I continued to fly by instruments and looked outside again at approximately 300 ft. At this time the first officer said 'there is someone on the runway.' he queried the tower about this and the controller's response was 'he is airborne.' the aircraft clearly was not airborne. I continued the approach thinking the aircraft must just be beginning to rotate and that I would probably see him lift off the runway any second. I started to 'check' the descent at about 30 ft and as it was obvious this aircraft was still on the runway, I executed a go around. The tower controller gave us a turn to 140 degrees and an altitude clearance of 8000 ft. The first officer later told me that the aircraft on the runway had just begun to rotate as we were in the climb and turn to 140 degrees. He said he could see it was an air carrier MD80. My obvious concerns are, why was no one advised of the very significant change in the WX, and with these WX conditions why were they requesting 190 KTS to the marker (especially since I thought FAA SOP now was 180 KTS to the marker even in VFR conditions)? Also, why were we not advised of a departure prior to our arrival when this is something that is normally done in VFR? And why was the tower so surprised when we executetd the go around -- I have serious doubts as to their ability to see the runway in WX conditions of ceiling 600 ft versus 1000 ft. And yes, the controller's tone of voice indicated surprise and annoyance when we executed the go around which is entirely out of line. I would appreciate a response on this situation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR B737 EXECUTES GAR AT 30 FT DUE AN ACR MD80 ON TKOF ROLL ON THE SAME RWY. RPTED THAT THE MD80 ROTATED WHEN THE B737 IS IN GAR CLB AND A DIRECTED TURN AWAY FROM THE MD80 BY THE LCL CTLR. RPTR ALLEGES WX SPECIAL WAS NOT GIVEN TO FLC.

Narrative: JUST PRIOR TO BEGINNING THE DSCNT INTO THE DENVER AREA, MY FO OBTAINED THE ATIS FOR DEN. THE ATIS WAS THE XX00Z INFO STATING AN OVCST LAYER AT 2600 FT, VISIBILITY 10 SM, WIND 110 DEGS 5 KTS, ALTIMETER 3049, TEMP 17, DEWPOINT 15. WITH THIS INFO I BRIEFED A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 17R STATING THAT IT WOULD BE BACKED UP BY THE ILS FOR THAT RWY. I BRIEFED THE APCH PER SOP, INCLUDING ALL OF THE REQUIRED INFO ON THE APCH PLATE, BUT EXPECTING TO BREAK OUT AND COMPLETE THE APCH VISUALLY. I DID NOT INTEND TO USE THE AUTOPLT OR THE FLT DIRECTOR AS IS REQUIRED BY SOP IF THE WX IS BELOW A CERTAIN STANDARD. A SPECIAL TO THE ATIS WAS ISSUED AT XX39Z AND NONE OF THE APCH CTLRS NOR THE TWR CTLR ADVISED ANYONE ON THE FREQ OF THIS SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE CEILING. THE NEW ATIS STATED A BROKEN LAYER AT 800 FT, BROKEN AT 1400 FT, AND OVCST AT 1900 FT. REMARKS SAID CEILINGS VARIABLE AT 600-1000 FT. THE VISIBILITY WAS GIVEN AS 10 SM AND WINDS 08 DEGS 10 KTS. WE WERE VECTORED TO THE FINAL APCH COURSE AND INSTRUCTED TO CALL THE TWR OVER JOULE AND ALSO REQUESTED TO DO 190 KTS TO THE MARKER, WHICH IS ONLY 4.5 MI FROM THE END OF THE RWY. THEY WERE REQUESTING THIS SPD OF EVERY ACFT ON THE APCH. THE FO CONTACTED THE TWR CTLR AT JOULE AND WE WERE CLRED TO LAND. NOTHING WAS SAID ABOUT A DEP PRIOR TO OUR ARR. WE BROKE OUT OF THE OVCST LAYER AT APPROX 550 FT. I COULD SEE THE FIRST HALF OF THE RWY WHEN I GLANCED OUTSIDE THE FIRST TIME, ALTHOUGH THE VISIBILITY DID NOT APPEAR TO BE 10 SM. I CONTINUED TO FLY BY INSTS AND LOOKED OUTSIDE AGAIN AT APPROX 300 FT. AT THIS TIME THE FO SAID 'THERE IS SOMEONE ON THE RWY.' HE QUERIED THE TWR ABOUT THIS AND THE CTLR'S RESPONSE WAS 'HE IS AIRBORNE.' THE ACFT CLRLY WAS NOT AIRBORNE. I CONTINUED THE APCH THINKING THE ACFT MUST JUST BE BEGINNING TO ROTATE AND THAT I WOULD PROBABLY SEE HIM LIFT OFF THE RWY ANY SECOND. I STARTED TO 'CHK' THE DSCNT AT ABOUT 30 FT AND AS IT WAS OBVIOUS THIS ACFT WAS STILL ON THE RWY, I EXECUTED A GAR. THE TWR CTLR GAVE US A TURN TO 140 DEGS AND AN ALT CLRNC OF 8000 FT. THE FO LATER TOLD ME THAT THE ACFT ON THE RWY HAD JUST BEGUN TO ROTATE AS WE WERE IN THE CLB AND TURN TO 140 DEGS. HE SAID HE COULD SEE IT WAS AN ACR MD80. MY OBVIOUS CONCERNS ARE, WHY WAS NO ONE ADVISED OF THE VERY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE WX, AND WITH THESE WX CONDITIONS WHY WERE THEY REQUESTING 190 KTS TO THE MARKER (ESPECIALLY SINCE I THOUGHT FAA SOP NOW WAS 180 KTS TO THE MARKER EVEN IN VFR CONDITIONS)? ALSO, WHY WERE WE NOT ADVISED OF A DEP PRIOR TO OUR ARR WHEN THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS NORMALLY DONE IN VFR? AND WHY WAS THE TWR SO SURPRISED WHEN WE EXECUTETD THE GAR -- I HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS AS TO THEIR ABILITY TO SEE THE RWY IN WX CONDITIONS OF CEILING 600 FT VERSUS 1000 FT. AND YES, THE CTLR'S TONE OF VOICE INDICATED SURPRISE AND ANNOYANCE WHEN WE EXECUTED THE GAR WHICH IS ENTIRELY OUT OF LINE. I WOULD APPRECIATE A RESPONSE ON THIS SIT.

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.