Narrative:

I was requested to transport an elderly man (on oxygen) and his wife, also elderly, from marquette county airport to rochester, mn, airport. This flight was requested because, being on oxygen due to a heart condition, commercial flts would not accept him. We filed as a 'lifeguard' IFR flight from mqt to rst. We taxied out to runway 26 following a sabreliner. Since we were second in line for takeoff we parked to the jet's right side so as not to be in his direct line when he applied power. I called green bay radio for my IFR clearance and received same. At the same time I was directed to monitor 119.1 (ZMP) as well as grb frequency. The sabreliner was released and took off. We taxied closer to runway 26 and faced partially to the east so we could view any approaching traffic since runway 26 was the runway in use. WX was pleasant and VFR and wind quite calm. After a seemingly long wait we were finally released for takeoff, directed to maintain runway heading and climb to 4000 ft. All this time we were monitoring ZMP and grb radio. As we started our takeoff run we checked for incoming traffic, observing none, we proceeded. As we accelerated our takeoff we noticed the caravan just approaching very slowly, hardly moving, toward the runway at the first intersection. Since we were quite aware that we would be past the caravan in a matter of seconds we continued our takeoff run. The next day we received a phone call to the effect we were a party to a possible collision. This in itself was a ridiculous statement! When we passed the caravan there was at least 100 ft or more between the 2 planes. We started our takeoff run basically on the right side of the runway which is 150 ft wide for over 6000 ft. The entire runway was dry and in excellent condition. After our most pleasant trip to rst and back, we later called the family to report on the flight. The daughter-in-law told us that on our takeoff people in the FBO building thought they were aware of a potential collision between the 2 aircraft. From the location of the FBO building, which is about 1/4 mi horizontal, they could not possibly be in a position to evaluate any horizontal distance on the runway or of the aircraft. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states his aircraft is a skylane. He has spoken to the caravan pilot and was informed that someone in the terminal reported the incident to the cargo carrier for whom the caravan pilot worked and he has been fired. Reporter was very upset and said there was no reason for that to happen. The aircraft were not that close, the caravan was slowing to a stop and waiting for his departure. Reporter claims that the people making these judgements were so far away they could not truly judge the separation. There has been no FAA follow-up.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SKYLANE ON TKOF SIGHTS CARAVAN SLOWING AT INTXN.

Narrative: I WAS REQUESTED TO TRANSPORT AN ELDERLY MAN (ON OXYGEN) AND HIS WIFE, ALSO ELDERLY, FROM MARQUETTE COUNTY ARPT TO ROCHESTER, MN, ARPT. THIS FLT WAS REQUESTED BECAUSE, BEING ON OXYGEN DUE TO A HEART CONDITION, COMMERCIAL FLTS WOULD NOT ACCEPT HIM. WE FILED AS A 'LIFEGUARD' IFR FLT FROM MQT TO RST. WE TAXIED OUT TO RWY 26 FOLLOWING A SABRELINER. SINCE WE WERE SECOND IN LINE FOR TKOF WE PARKED TO THE JET'S R SIDE SO AS NOT TO BE IN HIS DIRECT LINE WHEN HE APPLIED PWR. I CALLED GREEN BAY RADIO FOR MY IFR CLRNC AND RECEIVED SAME. AT THE SAME TIME I WAS DIRECTED TO MONITOR 119.1 (ZMP) AS WELL AS GRB FREQ. THE SABRELINER WAS RELEASED AND TOOK OFF. WE TAXIED CLOSER TO RWY 26 AND FACED PARTIALLY TO THE E SO WE COULD VIEW ANY APCHING TFC SINCE RWY 26 WAS THE RWY IN USE. WX WAS PLEASANT AND VFR AND WIND QUITE CALM. AFTER A SEEMINGLY LONG WAIT WE WERE FINALLY RELEASED FOR TKOF, DIRECTED TO MAINTAIN RWY HDG AND CLB TO 4000 FT. ALL THIS TIME WE WERE MONITORING ZMP AND GRB RADIO. AS WE STARTED OUR TKOF RUN WE CHKED FOR INCOMING TFC, OBSERVING NONE, WE PROCEEDED. AS WE ACCELERATED OUR TKOF WE NOTICED THE CARAVAN JUST APCHING VERY SLOWLY, HARDLY MOVING, TOWARD THE RWY AT THE FIRST INTXN. SINCE WE WERE QUITE AWARE THAT WE WOULD BE PAST THE CARAVAN IN A MATTER OF SECONDS WE CONTINUED OUR TKOF RUN. THE NEXT DAY WE RECEIVED A PHONE CALL TO THE EFFECT WE WERE A PARTY TO A POSSIBLE COLLISION. THIS IN ITSELF WAS A RIDICULOUS STATEMENT! WHEN WE PASSED THE CARAVAN THERE WAS AT LEAST 100 FT OR MORE BTWN THE 2 PLANES. WE STARTED OUR TKOF RUN BASICALLY ON THE R SIDE OF THE RWY WHICH IS 150 FT WIDE FOR OVER 6000 FT. THE ENTIRE RWY WAS DRY AND IN EXCELLENT CONDITION. AFTER OUR MOST PLEASANT TRIP TO RST AND BACK, WE LATER CALLED THE FAMILY TO RPT ON THE FLT. THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW TOLD US THAT ON OUR TKOF PEOPLE IN THE FBO BUILDING THOUGHT THEY WERE AWARE OF A POTENTIAL COLLISION BTWN THE 2 ACFT. FROM THE LOCATION OF THE FBO BUILDING, WHICH IS ABOUT 1/4 MI HORIZ, THEY COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE IN A POS TO EVALUATE ANY HORIZ DISTANCE ON THE RWY OR OF THE ACFT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HIS ACFT IS A SKYLANE. HE HAS SPOKEN TO THE CARAVAN PLT AND WAS INFORMED THAT SOMEONE IN THE TERMINAL RPTED THE INCIDENT TO THE CARGO CARRIER FOR WHOM THE CARAVAN PLT WORKED AND HE HAS BEEN FIRED. RPTR WAS VERY UPSET AND SAID THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. THE ACFT WERE NOT THAT CLOSE, THE CARAVAN WAS SLOWING TO A STOP AND WAITING FOR HIS DEP. RPTR CLAIMS THAT THE PEOPLE MAKING THESE JUDGEMENTS WERE SO FAR AWAY THEY COULD NOT TRULY JUDGE THE SEPARATION. THERE HAS BEEN NO FAA FOLLOW-UP.

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.