Narrative:

I experienced a 5 min delay in being cleared for takeoff on a VFR 135 charter in a PA28 type aircraft. 1 or 2 aircraft were using the runway 24 ILS for practice approachs. I was unaware of any movement of military C-130 or helicopter traffic. This could have been due to my being on tower frequency, or due to the other traffic being on UHF. When cleared onto runway 19 for takeoff, I observed a C-130 moving rapidly towards runway 6. From my position, it appeared the aircraft may be taking off. Nearing vr, I queried tower 'what is the C-130 doing?' instead of replying, tower delayed a reply and came back with 'aircraft use call sign when talking to tower.' I continued the roll, having more than 2500 ft remaining. I eventually observed the C-130 stop prior to the runway 6 threshold. I rotated and had additional communications with the tower, who did eventually say that the traffic would hold short. Had I been in a larger aircraft, I would have aborted the takeoff. I feel that a timely notification of the C-130's intentions would have been helpful. I have noticed a number of nonstandard procedures used at this non functional control tower. I feel that much of the communications coming from this tower seem inappropriately concerned with reprimanding aircraft rather than providing timely safety advisories. I recommend that the FAA spend a few days monitoring communications here. I have flown in the anchorage class C/D area, in and around chicago's class B, at daytona beach, fl, and prescott, az, high density training environment and I have never seen tower services this bad before. I have a bs degree in aeronautical science, and a minor in aviation safety. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he and the other instructors at the FBO have tried since day 1 to maintain a positive relationship with this non federal control tower. When he supervises his solo students he goes to the tower to monitor the student procedures and communicate with the tower personnel. He has also talked to the tower chief and discussed the 'attitude' of the controllers. Nothing has changed. This is only one of many such incidents. Analyst recommended the FAA hot line, but reporter is reluctant to use it since he feels the FAA usually overreacts and the situation does not improve. He sincerely thinks remedial training of the controllers would be beneficial similar to the remedial training for pilots when a problem occurs. There is a very eclectic mix of activity at this airport with a variety of military and civilian helicopters, C-130's and all range of GA aircraft. His primary concern is regarding safety and feels this is lacking at the moment.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA28 ON TKOF ROLL SIGHTS C-130 TAXIING RAPIDLY FOR TKOF ON INTERSECTING RWY.

Narrative: I EXPERIENCED A 5 MIN DELAY IN BEING CLRED FOR TKOF ON A VFR 135 CHARTER IN A PA28 TYPE ACFT. 1 OR 2 ACFT WERE USING THE RWY 24 ILS FOR PRACTICE APCHS. I WAS UNAWARE OF ANY MOVEMENT OF MIL C-130 OR HELI TFC. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN DUE TO MY BEING ON TWR FREQ, OR DUE TO THE OTHER TFC BEING ON UHF. WHEN CLRED ONTO RWY 19 FOR TKOF, I OBSERVED A C-130 MOVING RAPIDLY TOWARDS RWY 6. FROM MY POS, IT APPEARED THE ACFT MAY BE TAKING OFF. NEARING VR, I QUERIED TWR 'WHAT IS THE C-130 DOING?' INSTEAD OF REPLYING, TWR DELAYED A REPLY AND CAME BACK WITH 'ACFT USE CALL SIGN WHEN TALKING TO TWR.' I CONTINUED THE ROLL, HAVING MORE THAN 2500 FT REMAINING. I EVENTUALLY OBSERVED THE C-130 STOP PRIOR TO THE RWY 6 THRESHOLD. I ROTATED AND HAD ADDITIONAL COMS WITH THE TWR, WHO DID EVENTUALLY SAY THAT THE TFC WOULD HOLD SHORT. HAD I BEEN IN A LARGER ACFT, I WOULD HAVE ABORTED THE TKOF. I FEEL THAT A TIMELY NOTIFICATION OF THE C-130'S INTENTIONS WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL. I HAVE NOTICED A NUMBER OF NONSTANDARD PROCS USED AT THIS NON FUNCTIONAL CTL TWR. I FEEL THAT MUCH OF THE COMS COMING FROM THIS TWR SEEM INAPPROPRIATELY CONCERNED WITH REPRIMANDING ACFT RATHER THAN PROVIDING TIMELY SAFETY ADVISORIES. I RECOMMEND THAT THE FAA SPEND A FEW DAYS MONITORING COMS HERE. I HAVE FLOWN IN THE ANCHORAGE CLASS C/D AREA, IN AND AROUND CHICAGO'S CLASS B, AT DAYTONA BEACH, FL, AND PRESCOTT, AZ, HIGH DENSITY TRAINING ENVIRONMENT AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN TWR SVCS THIS BAD BEFORE. I HAVE A BS DEGREE IN AERONAUTICAL SCIENCE, AND A MINOR IN AVIATION SAFETY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE AND THE OTHER INSTRUCTORS AT THE FBO HAVE TRIED SINCE DAY 1 TO MAINTAIN A POSITIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS NON FEDERAL CTL TWR. WHEN HE SUPERVISES HIS SOLO STUDENTS HE GOES TO THE TWR TO MONITOR THE STUDENT PROCS AND COMMUNICATE WITH THE TWR PERSONNEL. HE HAS ALSO TALKED TO THE TWR CHIEF AND DISCUSSED THE 'ATTITUDE' OF THE CTLRS. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THIS IS ONLY ONE OF MANY SUCH INCIDENTS. ANALYST RECOMMENDED THE FAA HOT LINE, BUT RPTR IS RELUCTANT TO USE IT SINCE HE FEELS THE FAA USUALLY OVERREACTS AND THE SIT DOES NOT IMPROVE. HE SINCERELY THINKS REMEDIAL TRAINING OF THE CTLRS WOULD BE BENEFICIAL SIMILAR TO THE REMEDIAL TRAINING FOR PLTS WHEN A PROB OCCURS. THERE IS A VERY ECLECTIC MIX OF ACTIVITY AT THIS ARPT WITH A VARIETY OF MIL AND CIVILIAN HELIS, C-130'S AND ALL RANGE OF GA ACFT. HIS PRIMARY CONCERN IS REGARDING SAFETY AND FEELS THIS IS LACKING AT THE MOMENT.

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.