Narrative:

During the rollout on runway 19L, approaching the taxiway B turnoff, we were asked to take taxiway B if able. I was the PNF and responded with roger. After glancing down at the airspeed indicator and returning outside, I saw a gulfstream departing on runway 7L pass through the intersection. You will note there is not much distance between taxiway B and runway 7L. Nearly at the same time, the tower controller cleared us to cross runway 7L and make a left on taxiway D. Why would we need a clearance to cross runway 7L when we were cleared to land on runway 19L with no restrs? We were never told to hold short of runway 7L, the only clearance given was to land on runway 19L. I talked to tower later and this was confirmed. While I do not believe we violated any clearance, nor was there any loss of separation, I find 2 contributing factors to the possible loss of separation during this landing. First, when I talked to tower, she said runway 7L takeoff clearance was based on the runway 19L aircraft turning at taxiway B even though no hold short is given to the aircraft landing on runway 19L. This is done via a handoff between the tower controllers when the runway 19L controller thinks their aircraft will exit. In this case, the runway 7L departure had to have started his takeoff roll prior to us acknowledging our turn at taxiway B. Had we not been able to stop or did not hear over the noise, tower's request to turn at taxiway B things could have ended badly. The second problem is that the runways are controled by different frequencys, unlike sfo and ord. Las tower has marked their tapes. I hope we can change the procedures and make things safer.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A320 LNDG LAS IS CONCERNED WITH RWY 7L DEP PROC WITH SIMULTANEOUS LNDGS ON RWY 19L.

Narrative: DURING THE ROLLOUT ON RWY 19L, APCHING THE TXWY B TURNOFF, WE WERE ASKED TO TAKE TXWY B IF ABLE. I WAS THE PNF AND RESPONDED WITH ROGER. AFTER GLANCING DOWN AT THE AIRSPD INDICATOR AND RETURNING OUTSIDE, I SAW A GULFSTREAM DEPARTING ON RWY 7L PASS THROUGH THE INTXN. YOU WILL NOTE THERE IS NOT MUCH DISTANCE BTWN TXWY B AND RWY 7L. NEARLY AT THE SAME TIME, THE TWR CTLR CLRED US TO CROSS RWY 7L AND MAKE A L ON TXWY D. WHY WOULD WE NEED A CLRNC TO CROSS RWY 7L WHEN WE WERE CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 19L WITH NO RESTRS? WE WERE NEVER TOLD TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 7L, THE ONLY CLRNC GIVEN WAS TO LAND ON RWY 19L. I TALKED TO TWR LATER AND THIS WAS CONFIRMED. WHILE I DO NOT BELIEVE WE VIOLATED ANY CLRNC, NOR WAS THERE ANY LOSS OF SEPARATION, I FIND 2 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THE POSSIBLE LOSS OF SEPARATION DURING THIS LNDG. FIRST, WHEN I TALKED TO TWR, SHE SAID RWY 7L TKOF CLRNC WAS BASED ON THE RWY 19L ACFT TURNING AT TXWY B EVEN THOUGH NO HOLD SHORT IS GIVEN TO THE ACFT LNDG ON RWY 19L. THIS IS DONE VIA A HDOF BTWN THE TWR CTLRS WHEN THE RWY 19L CTLR THINKS THEIR ACFT WILL EXIT. IN THIS CASE, THE RWY 7L DEP HAD TO HAVE STARTED HIS TKOF ROLL PRIOR TO US ACKNOWLEDGING OUR TURN AT TXWY B. HAD WE NOT BEEN ABLE TO STOP OR DID NOT HEAR OVER THE NOISE, TWR'S REQUEST TO TURN AT TXWY B THINGS COULD HAVE ENDED BADLY. THE SECOND PROB IS THAT THE RWYS ARE CTLED BY DIFFERENT FREQS, UNLIKE SFO AND ORD. LAS TWR HAS MARKED THEIR TAPES. I HOPE WE CAN CHANGE THE PROCS AND MAKE THINGS SAFER.

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.