Narrative:

Uin AWOS on my approach reporting VFR, wind 120 degrees at 8 KTS. Cessna traffic in the uin area was making touch and go traffic on runway 13. On descent to uin from the northeast, I heard aircraft X call kansas city for IFR clearance to brl. With the winds 120 degrees at 8 KTS, I was planning to use runway 13 at uin. Kansas city cleared me for the visual approach to uin, I overflew centerfield and entered the traffic pattern upwind to crosswind to downwind for runway 13 behind the touch and go traffic. While entering the pattern, I canceled IFR and observed aircraft X taxiing from the terminal ramp towards runway 4 apparently for departure. I did not hear aircraft X on the CTAF, so I requested ZKC to advise aircraft X that traffic was currently in the pattern for runway 13. While cessna traffic was crossing threshold for runway 13, I was on base leg, aircraft X reported on the CTAF, 'aircraft X taxiing into position and hold runway 4 for landing traffic.' I announced my position frequently and continued approach ready to abort if necessary, while paying close attention to the actions of aircraft X on runway 4. Aircraft X did not move, so I continued the landing uneventfully. While taxiing to the ramp, I observed a second cessna enter the pattern for runway 13. I called aircraft X on CTAF and said I would report their actions to the FAA. This said, aircraft X taxied from runway 4 to runway 13 for departure. While airborne uin to destination, I talked to aircraft X via 122.75. They said they did not violate any regulations, could use any runway they wanted, and that their company would support their actions 100%. Their attitude was very arrogant. This is the second time our company has been involved with this commuter who insists on using a crossing runway while winds favor and local traffic is using a different runway. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that this incident was reported to the FAA, but that he had not personally been back to the airport to know if the same commuter was using their own discretionary runway without regard for the wind favored runway in use!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF A CPR BEECH 200 OBSERVED A COMMUTER BEECH 1900 TAXI OUT TO USE AN UNFAVORED CROSS RWY AT AN UNCTLED ARPT WITHOUT MAKING ADVISORY ANNOUNCEMENTS. THE RPTR WAS ABLE TO BRING THIS TO THE ATTN OF THE COMMUTER FLC CAUSING THEM TO REPOSITION THEIR ACFT AND USE THE FAVORED RWY. THIS IS THE SAME ARPT (UIN) THAT EXPERIENCED A FATAL COLLISION AT A RWY XING.

Narrative: UIN AWOS ON MY APCH RPTING VFR, WIND 120 DEGS AT 8 KTS. CESSNA TFC IN THE UIN AREA WAS MAKING TOUCH AND GO TFC ON RWY 13. ON DSCNT TO UIN FROM THE NE, I HEARD ACFT X CALL KANSAS CITY FOR IFR CLRNC TO BRL. WITH THE WINDS 120 DEGS AT 8 KTS, I WAS PLANNING TO USE RWY 13 AT UIN. KANSAS CITY CLRED ME FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO UIN, I OVERFLEW CENTERFIELD AND ENTERED THE TFC PATTERN UPWIND TO XWIND TO DOWNWIND FOR RWY 13 BEHIND THE TOUCH AND GO TFC. WHILE ENTERING THE PATTERN, I CANCELED IFR AND OBSERVED ACFT X TAXIING FROM THE TERMINAL RAMP TOWARDS RWY 4 APPARENTLY FOR DEP. I DID NOT HEAR ACFT X ON THE CTAF, SO I REQUESTED ZKC TO ADVISE ACFT X THAT TFC WAS CURRENTLY IN THE PATTERN FOR RWY 13. WHILE CESSNA TFC WAS XING THRESHOLD FOR RWY 13, I WAS ON BASE LEG, ACFT X RPTED ON THE CTAF, 'ACFT X TAXIING INTO POS AND HOLD RWY 4 FOR LNDG TFC.' I ANNOUNCED MY POS FREQUENTLY AND CONTINUED APCH READY TO ABORT IF NECESSARY, WHILE PAYING CLOSE ATTN TO THE ACTIONS OF ACFT X ON RWY 4. ACFT X DID NOT MOVE, SO I CONTINUED THE LNDG UNEVENTFULLY. WHILE TAXIING TO THE RAMP, I OBSERVED A SECOND CESSNA ENTER THE PATTERN FOR RWY 13. I CALLED ACFT X ON CTAF AND SAID I WOULD RPT THEIR ACTIONS TO THE FAA. THIS SAID, ACFT X TAXIED FROM RWY 4 TO RWY 13 FOR DEP. WHILE AIRBORNE UIN TO DEST, I TALKED TO ACFT X VIA 122.75. THEY SAID THEY DID NOT VIOLATE ANY REGS, COULD USE ANY RWY THEY WANTED, AND THAT THEIR COMPANY WOULD SUPPORT THEIR ACTIONS 100%. THEIR ATTITUDE WAS VERY ARROGANT. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME OUR COMPANY HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS COMMUTER WHO INSISTS ON USING A XING RWY WHILE WINDS FAVOR AND LCL TFC IS USING A DIFFERENT RWY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THIS INCIDENT WAS RPTED TO THE FAA, BUT THAT HE HAD NOT PERSONALLY BEEN BACK TO THE ARPT TO KNOW IF THE SAME COMMUTER WAS USING THEIR OWN DISCRETIONARY RWY WITHOUT REGARD FOR THE WIND FAVORED RWY IN USE!

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.