|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : isp.airport|
|Altitude||agl single value : 0|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 91|
|Flight Phase||ground : takeoff roll|
ground : maintenance
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : local|
|Experience||controller limited radar : 20|
controller time certified in position1 : 15
controller time certified in position2 : 3
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Anomaly||non adherence : clearance|
non adherence : published procedure
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Problem Areas||Flight Crew Human Performance|
ATC Human Performance
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
Aircraft on IFR flight plan; pilot unfamiliar with field. Pilot was instructed to taxi to runway 33L via taxiway C and runway 10. Pilot crossed runway 33L and was instructed to hold short on the other side (runway 28). Pilot was cleared for takeoff on runway 33L; but departed runway 28. I expected him to do so; and got permission from ground control to use runway 28. I could not instruct the aircraft to taxi into position and hold as I would have liked; as we did not have sufficient staffing to use tiph. No other aircraft were involved; and no paperwork was filed. Preventing the pilot from crossing the runway while taxiing would have been difficult; but if I were allowed to use tiph; the aircraft would have departed the correct runway.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ISP CTLR DESCRIBED WRONG RWY DEP; ALLEGING THAT TIPH RESTRICTIONS WERE A CAUSAL FACTOR IN THIS PLTDEV.
Narrative: ACFT ON IFR FLT PLAN; PLT UNFAMILIAR WITH FIELD. PLT WAS INSTRUCTED TO TAXI TO RWY 33L VIA TXWY C AND RWY 10. PLT CROSSED RWY 33L AND WAS INSTRUCTED TO HOLD SHORT ON THE OTHER SIDE (RWY 28). PLT WAS CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 33L; BUT DEPARTED RWY 28. I EXPECTED HIM TO DO SO; AND GOT PERMISSION FROM GND CTL TO USE RWY 28. I COULD NOT INSTRUCT THE ACFT TO TAXI INTO POS AND HOLD AS I WOULD HAVE LIKED; AS WE DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT STAFFING TO USE TIPH. NO OTHER ACFT WERE INVOLVED; AND NO PAPERWORK WAS FILED. PREVENTING THE PLT FROM XING THE RWY WHILE TAXIING WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT; BUT IF I WERE ALLOWED TO USE TIPH; THE ACFT WOULD HAVE DEPARTED THE CORRECT RWY.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.