Narrative:

Received taxi instructions at indianapolis international airport to taxi from our ramp to runway 5R for departure to phl. We proceeded to cross runway 32 on the route to departure end of runway 5R. No further communications from ground control were received (other than asking if we could use runway 32 for departure, which we declined). Runway 32 was clear of any aircraft when we crossed. We were cleared for takeoff on runway 5R by the tower. Upon arrival at phl, I was advised to contact the tower supervisor in ind, who informed me that we had been instructed to hold short of runway 32. Our failure to do so resulted in the cancellation of takeoff clearance for an aircraft approaching runway 32 for departure, and that we would be cited for the incursion. No attempt was made by the controller to stop our crossing of runway 32, although he must have seen us approaching as he had plenty of time to advise the tower controller to cancel takeoff clearance of the other aircraft. We were the only aircraft on the frequency. Some confusion in communications may have occurred when the ground controller asked if we could use runway 32 for departure (we declined) as we began our taxi, but I did not hear a hold short clearance and neither did the first officer recall receiving one. I would like to reiterate that the runway was clear when we crossed. Supplemental information from acn 392900: during taxi out ground asked if we could accept runway 32. After review of takeoff data we declined.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR F100 IS ALLEGED TO HAVE MADE AN UNAUTH RWY XING AT IND. ACFT GIVEN 'TAXI INSTRUCTIONS' TO RWY 5, CROSSED RWY 32 IN THE PROCESS. CTLR LATER SAID THERE WAS AN ACFT THAT HAD ITS TKOF CLRNC CANCELED ACCOUNT F100'S ACTIONS.

Narrative: RECEIVED TAXI INSTRUCTIONS AT INDIANAPOLIS INTL ARPT TO TAXI FROM OUR RAMP TO RWY 5R FOR DEP TO PHL. WE PROCEEDED TO CROSS RWY 32 ON THE RTE TO DEP END OF RWY 5R. NO FURTHER COMS FROM GND CTL WERE RECEIVED (OTHER THAN ASKING IF WE COULD USE RWY 32 FOR DEP, WHICH WE DECLINED). RWY 32 WAS CLR OF ANY ACFT WHEN WE CROSSED. WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 5R BY THE TWR. UPON ARR AT PHL, I WAS ADVISED TO CONTACT THE TWR SUPVR IN IND, WHO INFORMED ME THAT WE HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 32. OUR FAILURE TO DO SO RESULTED IN THE CANCELLATION OF TKOF CLRNC FOR AN ACFT APCHING RWY 32 FOR DEP, AND THAT WE WOULD BE CITED FOR THE INCURSION. NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE BY THE CTLR TO STOP OUR XING OF RWY 32, ALTHOUGH HE MUST HAVE SEEN US APCHING AS HE HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO ADVISE THE TWR CTLR TO CANCEL TKOF CLRNC OF THE OTHER ACFT. WE WERE THE ONLY ACFT ON THE FREQ. SOME CONFUSION IN COMS MAY HAVE OCCURRED WHEN THE GND CTLR ASKED IF WE COULD USE RWY 32 FOR DEP (WE DECLINED) AS WE BEGAN OUR TAXI, BUT I DID NOT HEAR A HOLD SHORT CLRNC AND NEITHER DID THE FO RECALL RECEIVING ONE. I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT THE RWY WAS CLR WHEN WE CROSSED. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 392900: DURING TAXI OUT GND ASKED IF WE COULD ACCEPT RWY 32. AFTER REVIEW OF TKOF DATA WE DECLINED.

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.