Narrative:

Tower gave clearance to taxi in position traffic 4 mi final, I taxied in position and held in place. Aircraft which landed cleared, I took off. Tower advised we were not given takeoff clearance. We were asked by departure controller to call when we landed. I advised montgomery clearance del of landing time, and discussed what happened. They advised to be more alert as to clrncs, and not to call back they just wanted my assurances that there would be no more miscoms! I think the advising of traffic on final contributed to my haste. I would have been happy to hold for his landing. I think controllers insert the sense of urgency into pilots' thinking by advising of traffic, which in most cases, is a way of making the controller's job less stressful. Some controllers will simply control and let pilots do the best job they can. If there is no conflict, then the fact that there is traffic on final is just a fact and does not require me to hurry up and takeoff. However, this does not excuse me from hearing, understanding and complying with ATC clrncs! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter aircraft was a king air F90, one of very few turbines that come and go at this airport. What disturbed reporter was the sense of urgency in controller's instructions. Reporter would have been happy to wait until the traffic had landed and exited the runway rather than get the hurry up treatment. He admits his error. He feels that controllers at this airport seem to single out the turbines and give very unexpected clrncs to separate their traffic. He has gotten clrncs that have nothing to do with the original clearance and cause a rush to dig out additional charts to comply. Reporter is especially aware of position having been turned toward mountains and toward the mexican border at times.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: KING AIR CORP PLT DEPARTS WITHOUT CLRNC AFTER BEING CLRED TO POS AND HOLD.

Narrative: TWR GAVE CLRNC TO TAXI IN POS TFC 4 MI FINAL, I TAXIED IN POS AND HELD IN PLACE. ACFT WHICH LANDED CLRED, I TOOK OFF. TWR ADVISED WE WERE NOT GIVEN TKOF CLRNC. WE WERE ASKED BY DEP CTLR TO CALL WHEN WE LANDED. I ADVISED MONTGOMERY CLRNC DEL OF LNDG TIME, AND DISCUSSED WHAT HAPPENED. THEY ADVISED TO BE MORE ALERT AS TO CLRNCS, AND NOT TO CALL BACK THEY JUST WANTED MY ASSURANCES THAT THERE WOULD BE NO MORE MISCOMS! I THINK THE ADVISING OF TFC ON FINAL CONTRIBUTED TO MY HASTE. I WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO HOLD FOR HIS LNDG. I THINK CTLRS INSERT THE SENSE OF URGENCY INTO PLTS' THINKING BY ADVISING OF TFC, WHICH IN MOST CASES, IS A WAY OF MAKING THE CTLR'S JOB LESS STRESSFUL. SOME CTLRS WILL SIMPLY CTL AND LET PLTS DO THE BEST JOB THEY CAN. IF THERE IS NO CONFLICT, THEN THE FACT THAT THERE IS TFC ON FINAL IS JUST A FACT AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ME TO HURRY UP AND TKOF. HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT EXCUSE ME FROM HEARING, UNDERSTANDING AND COMPLYING WITH ATC CLRNCS! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ACFT WAS A KING AIR F90, ONE OF VERY FEW TURBINES THAT COME AND GO AT THIS ARPT. WHAT DISTURBED RPTR WAS THE SENSE OF URGENCY IN CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS. RPTR WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO WAIT UNTIL THE TFC HAD LANDED AND EXITED THE RWY RATHER THAN GET THE HURRY UP TREATMENT. HE ADMITS HIS ERROR. HE FEELS THAT CTLRS AT THIS ARPT SEEM TO SINGLE OUT THE TURBINES AND GIVE VERY UNEXPECTED CLRNCS TO SEPARATE THEIR TFC. HE HAS GOTTEN CLRNCS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL CLRNC AND CAUSE A RUSH TO DIG OUT ADDITIONAL CHARTS TO COMPLY. RPTR IS ESPECIALLY AWARE OF POS HAVING BEEN TURNED TOWARD MOUNTAINS AND TOWARD THE MEXICAN BORDER AT TIMES.

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.