Narrative:

On turning to final approach, ATC (tower at sfb) cleared me to land. The previous aircraft (an small aircraft, probably a type) had been cleared for a touch and go. I observed the small aircraft touch down and roll out, anticipating his takeoff. When I was approximately 1/8 mi out, with the small aircraft still on the runway, I prepared for a go around. When the small aircraft turned on the runway (a 180 degree turn facing me), I shoved throttles and climbed out of there. The controller never told me to go around. When I clarified that the small aircraft was cleared for a touch and go, she concurred, but said the small aircraft pilot must have changed his mind. I believe the small aircraft pilot was a student. The instrument (if this was the case) should be re-examined to ascertain the method of instruction being provided. The controller should have anticipated a potential collision when a landing aircraft might not have been able to climb above the aircraft still on the runway taxiing toward the landing aircraft. After the incident, I did not hear the controller (a female) discuss the matter with the small aircraft pilot on the tower or ground frequency.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT CLEARED FOR TOUCH AND GO MADE A 180 DEGREE TURN ON THE RWY INSTEAD AND CAUSED A LNDG ACFT TO GO AROUND.

Narrative: ON TURNING TO FINAL APCH, ATC (TWR AT SFB) CLRED ME TO LAND. THE PREVIOUS ACFT (AN SMA, PROBABLY A TYPE) HAD BEEN CLRED FOR A TOUCH AND GO. I OBSERVED THE SMA TOUCH DOWN AND ROLL OUT, ANTICIPATING HIS TKOF. WHEN I WAS APPROX 1/8 MI OUT, WITH THE SMA STILL ON THE RWY, I PREPARED FOR A GAR. WHEN THE SMA TURNED ON THE RWY (A 180 DEG TURN FACING ME), I SHOVED THROTTLES AND CLBED OUT OF THERE. THE CTLR NEVER TOLD ME TO GO AROUND. WHEN I CLARIFIED THAT THE SMA WAS CLRED FOR A TOUCH AND GO, SHE CONCURRED, BUT SAID THE SMA PLT MUST HAVE CHANGED HIS MIND. I BELIEVE THE SMA PLT WAS A STUDENT. THE INSTR (IF THIS WAS THE CASE) SHOULD BE RE-EXAMINED TO ASCERTAIN THE METHOD OF INSTRUCTION BEING PROVIDED. THE CTLR SHOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED A POTENTIAL COLLISION WHEN A LNDG ACFT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CLB ABOVE THE ACFT STILL ON THE RWY TAXIING TOWARD THE LNDG ACFT. AFTER THE INCIDENT, I DID NOT HEAR THE CTLR (A FEMALE) DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH THE SMA PLT ON THE TWR OR GND FREQ.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.