Narrative:

My leg (gal-anc). After cleared for landing, I had the copilot request a long landing because it was rush hour and I thought I'd do my part to expedite. After approval, and told to clear at taxiway M (the high speed taxiway), I landed long, had reversed the propellers and heard a tower command, but only in part and as I was fast closing on exit taxiway I had no time to verify. Now the portion that I was able to hear was 'roll out, taxiway K.' I quickly queried my first officer and he stated he thought we were to roll out on the runway as we are so often told to do when runway 6R is in use. I presumed the tower controller was coordinating with ground to keep taxiway right clear for taxiing 14 departures, brought the propellers out of reverse, and rolled quickly toward the end when the controller said she had not so intended. I apologized and thought it a non issue, until yesterday. My chief pilot said he received word that there was another aircraft involved, that less than 7500 ft separated the two (the second I'm told was a C208).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RWY INCURSION CREATES A POTENTIAL GND CONFLICT WHEN THE PIC OF A BE1900 ELECTS TO ROLL PAST THE PLANNED HIGH SPD EXIT THINKING HE HEARD AN IMPLIED ROLLOUT CLRNC FROM TWR CTLR AT ANC, AK.

Narrative: MY LEG (GAL-ANC). AFTER CLRED FOR LNDG, I HAD THE COPLT REQUEST A LONG LNDG BECAUSE IT WAS RUSH HR AND I THOUGHT I'D DO MY PART TO EXPEDITE. AFTER APPROVAL, AND TOLD TO CLR AT TXWY M (THE HIGH SPD TXWY), I LANDED LONG, HAD REVERSED THE PROPS AND HEARD A TWR COMMAND, BUT ONLY IN PART AND AS I WAS FAST CLOSING ON EXIT TXWY I HAD NO TIME TO VERIFY. NOW THE PORTION THAT I WAS ABLE TO HEAR WAS 'ROLL OUT, TXWY K.' I QUICKLY QUERIED MY FO AND HE STATED HE THOUGHT WE WERE TO ROLL OUT ON THE RWY AS WE ARE SO OFTEN TOLD TO DO WHEN RWY 6R IS IN USE. I PRESUMED THE TWR CTLR WAS COORDINATING WITH GND TO KEEP TXWY R CLR FOR TAXIING 14 DEPS, BROUGHT THE PROPS OUT OF REVERSE, AND ROLLED QUICKLY TOWARD THE END WHEN THE CTLR SAID SHE HAD NOT SO INTENDED. I APOLOGIZED AND THOUGHT IT A NON ISSUE, UNTIL YESTERDAY. MY CHIEF PLT SAID HE RECEIVED WORD THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER ACFT INVOLVED, THAT LESS THAN 7500 FT SEPARATED THE TWO (THE SECOND I'M TOLD WAS A C208).

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.