Narrative:

A pitts was on vuo CTAF frequency; broadcasting position reports normally; and responding to my advisories. Right after he announced turning left downwind for runway 8; a sonex called ready to depart runway 26. I gave the sonex the usual information; plus advised him of inbound traffic; thinking he would wait for opposite direction traffic to land. No response. I then told the pitts to use caution for a possible departure. Right after the pitts reported turning final for runway 8; the sonex announced he was departing runway 26. I immediately advised the pitts of traffic departing opposite direction. The pitts executed a go-around; and the sonex departed runway 26. Open a tower at vuo; from which we could have easily controlled the traffic and prevented this incident. Pilots at vuo are encouraged to match pdx flow; which was runway 28 at the time. But it's an uncontrolled airport; and they're free to go either direction. My responsibility at the vuo advisory position is to advise the traffic at vuo of pertinent pdx traffic. It's the pilots' responsibility to separate themselves. The pitts probably heard the other pilot say runway 26; but the opposite direction situation was very dicey; so I wanted no doubt that he knew. By the way; our vuo procedures are a joke. ATC should not be on a CTAF frequency. It often confuses the pilots. If ATC is on frequency; pilots usually expect more than advisory service. Due to proximity to pdx; we need to control the traffic at vuo; and the only safe way to do that is with a tower.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PDX Controller described an opposite direction take off from VUO; the reporter suggesting a Tower be opened at VUO to reduce these types of events.

Narrative: A Pitts was on VUO CTAF frequency; broadcasting position reports normally; and responding to my advisories. Right after he announced turning left downwind for Runway 8; a Sonex called ready to depart Runway 26. I gave the Sonex the usual information; plus advised him of inbound traffic; thinking he would wait for opposite direction traffic to land. No response. I then told the Pitts to use caution for a possible departure. Right after the Pitts reported turning final for Runway 8; the Sonex announced he was departing Runway 26. I immediately advised the Pitts of traffic departing opposite direction. The Pitts executed a go-around; and the Sonex departed Runway 26. Open a Tower at VUO; from which we could have easily controlled the traffic and prevented this incident. Pilots at VUO are encouraged to match PDX flow; which was Runway 28 at the time. But it's an uncontrolled airport; and they're free to go either direction. My responsibility at the VUO advisory position is to advise the traffic at VUO of pertinent PDX traffic. It's the pilots' responsibility to separate themselves. The Pitts probably heard the other pilot say Runway 26; but the opposite direction situation was very dicey; so I wanted no doubt that he knew. By the way; our VUO procedures are a joke. ATC should not be on a CTAF frequency. It often confuses the pilots. If ATC is on frequency; pilots usually expect more than advisory service. Due to proximity to PDX; we need to control the traffic at VUO; and the only safe way to do that is with a Tower.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.