Narrative:

I was captain and PF on flight (eyw-fll) on may/93. Flight X was cleared for takeoff on runway 9 at eyw. Liftoff occurred at PM08L in VMC. After takeoff, at 400 ft MSL the flaps were retracted (normal procedures) and a turn to 360 degree was initiated by me. At this time, a military spc in landing confign appeared from our left rear overhead position passing ahead and continuing an approach to an easterly landing at key west NAS (navy runway is not marked but appears to be runway 7). Military Y passed an estimated 300 ft laterally and 100 ft vertically to our aircraft which was climbing at an estimated 1500 FPM. No evasive action (except to stop the turn to 360 degrees momentarily) was necessary as the spc descended to land. Contributing factors: while taxiing for takeoff I heard eyw tower personnel talking to an aircraft 'approaching the south shore.' this occurred during completion of our before takeoff checklist. Tower cleared the aircraft to call on 'left base.' aircraft corrected tower and suggested 'right base.' tower acknowledged this. Continuing taxi to runup area our flight X was #3 for takeoff and held for approximately 2-3 mins on a northerly heading. 1 aircraft was observed in area of normal left base but proved to be only transiting area (possible sightseeing aircraft and a biplane). Flight X was advised of aircraft south of field for landing at navy base and 'cleared for takeoff, turn left to 360 degrees.' I was unable to see any traffic on approach to eyw runway 9 or any traffic south of eyw after I taxied into position for the prescribed short field takeoff procedure. Our takeoff roll was normal. Climb out was normal until we sighted the spc at 400 ft. Factors: the overlapping traffic patterns have no doubt been a problem at eyw for yrs. It is physically impossible for a departing airplane at eyw (facing north in runup area) to see almost anything to the south nor (facing east in takeoff position) to see above and to right rear position. Acknowledging this, it seems that ATC should have some procedure to prevent a departure on ewy runway 9 whenever an aircraft (heavy) landing at the navy base is in and/or is executing an overlapping traffic pattern. Human factors: since I never heard the approaching airplane call on right base and I was never advised as to where the airplane was in its traffic pattern, I erroneously assumed that the advisory about the airplane being south of the field, meant that I was to expect traffic to my right. We both saw none (traffic) and proceeded to takeoff. My memories of this incident prompt thoughts of discontinuing my profession every day since the event took place. Supplemental information from acn 240067: I was working local. Air carrier light transport was released by approach control subject a military spc inbound to the navy base. The spc was southwest of our field. I cleared the light transport for takeoff with a left turn and told him of the military traffic and he acknowledged. After he was airborne he continued to climb straight out 90 degrees although his assigned heading was 360 degrees. The spc went over the top of light transport and he said he wanted to complain about the spc. I asked him if he had copied the military traffic that he had acknowledged. He did not answer.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC BTWN ARR DEP TFC.

Narrative: I WAS CAPT AND PF ON FLT (EYW-FLL) ON MAY/93. FLT X WAS CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 9 AT EYW. LIFTOFF OCCURRED AT PM08L IN VMC. AFTER TKOF, AT 400 FT MSL THE FLAPS WERE RETRACTED (NORMAL PROCS) AND A TURN TO 360 DEG WAS INITIATED BY ME. AT THIS TIME, A MIL SPC IN LNDG CONFIGN APPEARED FROM OUR L REAR OVERHEAD POS PASSING AHEAD AND CONTINUING AN APCH TO AN EASTERLY LNDG AT KEY WEST NAS (NAVY RWY IS NOT MARKED BUT APPEARS TO BE RWY 7). MIL Y PASSED AN ESTIMATED 300 FT LATERALLY AND 100 FT VERTICALLY TO OUR ACFT WHICH WAS CLBING AT AN ESTIMATED 1500 FPM. NO EVASIVE ACTION (EXCEPT TO STOP THE TURN TO 360 DEGS MOMENTARILY) WAS NECESSARY AS THE SPC DSNDED TO LAND. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: WHILE TAXIING FOR TKOF I HEARD EYW TWR PERSONNEL TALKING TO AN ACFT 'APCHING THE S SHORE.' THIS OCCURRED DURING COMPLETION OF OUR BEFORE TKOF CHKLIST. TWR CLRED THE ACFT TO CALL ON 'L BASE.' ACFT CORRECTED TWR AND SUGGESTED 'R BASE.' TWR ACKNOWLEDGED THIS. CONTINUING TAXI TO RUNUP AREA OUR FLT X WAS #3 FOR TKOF AND HELD FOR APPROX 2-3 MINS ON A NORTHERLY HDG. 1 ACFT WAS OBSERVED IN AREA OF NORMAL L BASE BUT PROVED TO BE ONLY TRANSITING AREA (POSSIBLE SIGHTSEEING ACFT AND A BIPLANE). FLT X WAS ADVISED OF ACFT S OF FIELD FOR LNDG AT NAVY BASE AND 'CLRED FOR TKOF, TURN L TO 360 DEGS.' I WAS UNABLE TO SEE ANY TFC ON APCH TO EYW RWY 9 OR ANY TFC S OF EYW AFTER I TAXIED INTO POS FOR THE PRESCRIBED SHORT FIELD TKOF PROC. OUR TKOF ROLL WAS NORMAL. CLBOUT WAS NORMAL UNTIL WE SIGHTED THE SPC AT 400 FT. FACTORS: THE OVERLAPPING TFC PATTERNS HAVE NO DOUBT BEEN A PROB AT EYW FOR YRS. IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A DEPARTING AIRPLANE AT EYW (FACING N IN RUNUP AREA) TO SEE ALMOST ANYTHING TO THE S NOR (FACING E IN TKOF POS) TO SEE ABOVE AND TO R REAR POS. ACKNOWLEDGING THIS, IT SEEMS THAT ATC SHOULD HAVE SOME PROC TO PREVENT A DEP ON EWY RWY 9 WHENEVER AN ACFT (HVY) LNDG AT THE NAVY BASE IS IN AND/OR IS EXECUTING AN OVERLAPPING TFC PATTERN. HUMAN FACTORS: SINCE I NEVER HEARD THE APCHING AIRPLANE CALL ON R BASE AND I WAS NEVER ADVISED AS TO WHERE THE AIRPLANE WAS IN ITS TFC PATTERN, I ERRONEOUSLY ASSUMED THAT THE ADVISORY ABOUT THE AIRPLANE BEING S OF THE FIELD, MEANT THAT I WAS TO EXPECT TFC TO MY R. WE BOTH SAW NONE (TFC) AND PROCEEDED TO TKOF. MY MEMORIES OF THIS INCIDENT PROMPT THOUGHTS OF DISCONTINUING MY PROFESSION EVERY DAY SINCE THE EVENT TOOK PLACE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 240067: I WAS WORKING LCL. ACR LTT WAS RELEASED BY APCH CTL SUBJECT A MIL SPC INBOUND TO THE NAVY BASE. THE SPC WAS SW OF OUR FIELD. I CLRED THE LTT FOR TKOF WITH A L TURN AND TOLD HIM OF THE MIL TFC AND HE ACKNOWLEDGED. AFTER HE WAS AIRBORNE HE CONTINUED TO CLB STRAIGHT OUT 90 DEGS ALTHOUGH HIS ASSIGNED HDG WAS 360 DEGS. THE SPC WENT OVER THE TOP OF LTT AND HE SAID HE WANTED TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SPC. I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD COPIED THE MIL TFC THAT HE HAD ACKNOWLEDGED. HE DID NOT ANSWER.

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.