Narrative:

Departing wickenburg, az (E25), I announced on CTAF/unicom taxiing from ramp for departure on runway 5. After run-up I taxied to and stopped short of runway 5, I again announced to wickenburg traffic that I was taxiing onto runway 5 for takeoff and a straight out departure. I listened for any traffic or response, but heard none. During takeoff roll, I saw an airplane, type unknown, departing runway 23 or going around from a rejected landing. This airplane sidestepped to the right side of the runway, and upon liftoff I turned to the right. Although unnerving, we avoided each other. During departure I quickly ran through a mental checklist to insure proper CTAF frequency/volume. The frequency and volume was correct and verified. Either I didn't hear the other traffic announce, or the other traffic was on a different frequency. Conditions that added to this event are: 1) local traffic normally lands runway 23 and departs runway 5. 2) runway slope is such that you cannot see from the departure end of either runway 5 or runway 23 to the opposite end and determine if there is opposite direction departure traffic. 3) winds were light and variable making either runway acceptable. In conclusion, I feel that additional attention must be given to both visual verification and listening carefully in all uncontrolled sits.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE33 DEPARTING E25 EXPERIENCED NEAR MISS WITH OPPOSITE DIRECTION TFC.

Narrative: DEPARTING WICKENBURG, AZ (E25), I ANNOUNCED ON CTAF/UNICOM TAXIING FROM RAMP FOR DEP ON RWY 5. AFTER RUN-UP I TAXIED TO AND STOPPED SHORT OF RWY 5, I AGAIN ANNOUNCED TO WICKENBURG TFC THAT I WAS TAXIING ONTO RWY 5 FOR TKOF AND A STRAIGHT OUT DEP. I LISTENED FOR ANY TFC OR RESPONSE, BUT HEARD NONE. DURING TKOF ROLL, I SAW AN AIRPLANE, TYPE UNKNOWN, DEPARTING RWY 23 OR GOING AROUND FROM A REJECTED LNDG. THIS AIRPLANE SIDESTEPPED TO THE R SIDE OF THE RWY, AND UPON LIFTOFF I TURNED TO THE R. ALTHOUGH UNNERVING, WE AVOIDED EACH OTHER. DURING DEP I QUICKLY RAN THROUGH A MENTAL CHKLIST TO INSURE PROPER CTAF FREQ/VOLUME. THE FREQ AND VOLUME WAS CORRECT AND VERIFIED. EITHER I DIDN'T HEAR THE OTHER TFC ANNOUNCE, OR THE OTHER TFC WAS ON A DIFFERENT FREQ. CONDITIONS THAT ADDED TO THIS EVENT ARE: 1) LCL TFC NORMALLY LANDS RWY 23 AND DEPARTS RWY 5. 2) RWY SLOPE IS SUCH THAT YOU CANNOT SEE FROM THE DEP END OF EITHER RWY 5 OR RWY 23 TO THE OPPOSITE END AND DETERMINE IF THERE IS OPPOSITE DIRECTION DEP TFC. 3) WINDS WERE LIGHT AND VARIABLE MAKING EITHER RWY ACCEPTABLE. IN CONCLUSION, I FEEL THAT ADDITIONAL ATTN MUST BE GIVEN TO BOTH VISUAL VERIFICATION AND LISTENING CAREFULLY IN ALL UNCTLED SITS.

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.