Narrative:

Misident of aircraft through inadvertent misinfo provided by flight crew led to the controller issuing instructions to an observed aircraft. The unobserved aircraft acknowledged first hold short, landing traffic. After arriving traffic began takeoff roll observed aircraft believed to be aircraft waiting departure was issued position and hold. Aircraft actually making departure request was at an intersection 4200 ft down-field unobserved. The aircraft did not request departure from the intersection. First aircraft did touch and go or stop and go. Second aircraft taxied into position behind preceding departure, still unobserved by the controller. BE23 advised 'tower did you see that? That guy went behind us, that was close.' PA32 advised 'tower you gave us position and hold then this guy went in front of us.' PA32 pilots advised during subsequent interview that the BE23 was observed to be landing and thought to be turning off in front of them. Pilots of PA32 queried about their request for departure and did they have their aircraft lighting on. They replied that they 'thought so.' when they were asked how close the 2 aircraft got, they replied 'we saw him, it was no big deal.' pilots were informed that further investigation was their option as the BE23 finished additional pattern work, wished the tower 'good night,' made no requests or inquiries. Even though all departure points were scanned the aircraft at the intersection was not observed. Had the word 'intersection' been used or position and hold after dark regulations been understood by the PA32 pilots (they were unaware that position and hold after dark at an intersection is not authority/authorized), they would have raised a verification. ATC has been educated to this rule, have the pilots?

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A GA PLT AT RWY INTXN TAKES A CLRNC MEANT FOR ANOTHER ACFT AND TAXIES IN FRONT OF AN ACFT MAKING TOUCH AND GO. THE CTLR DID NOT SEE THE ACFT TAXI INTO POS.

Narrative: MISIDENT OF ACFT THROUGH INADVERTENT MISINFO PROVIDED BY FLC LED TO THE CTLR ISSUING INSTRUCTIONS TO AN OBSERVED ACFT. THE UNOBSERVED ACFT ACKNOWLEDGED FIRST HOLD SHORT, LNDG TFC. AFTER ARRIVING TFC BEGAN TKOF ROLL OBSERVED ACFT BELIEVED TO BE ACFT WAITING DEP WAS ISSUED POS AND HOLD. ACFT ACTUALLY MAKING DEP REQUEST WAS AT AN INTXN 4200 FT DOWN-FIELD UNOBSERVED. THE ACFT DID NOT REQUEST DEP FROM THE INTXN. FIRST ACFT DID TOUCH AND GO OR STOP AND GO. SECOND ACFT TAXIED INTO POS BEHIND PRECEDING DEP, STILL UNOBSERVED BY THE CTLR. BE23 ADVISED 'TWR DID YOU SEE THAT? THAT GUY WENT BEHIND US, THAT WAS CLOSE.' PA32 ADVISED 'TWR YOU GAVE US POS AND HOLD THEN THIS GUY WENT IN FRONT OF US.' PA32 PLTS ADVISED DURING SUBSEQUENT INTERVIEW THAT THE BE23 WAS OBSERVED TO BE LNDG AND THOUGHT TO BE TURNING OFF IN FRONT OF THEM. PLTS OF PA32 QUERIED ABOUT THEIR REQUEST FOR DEP AND DID THEY HAVE THEIR ACFT LIGHTING ON. THEY REPLIED THAT THEY 'THOUGHT SO.' WHEN THEY WERE ASKED HOW CLOSE THE 2 ACFT GOT, THEY REPLIED 'WE SAW HIM, IT WAS NO BIG DEAL.' PLTS WERE INFORMED THAT FURTHER INVESTIGATION WAS THEIR OPTION AS THE BE23 FINISHED ADDITIONAL PATTERN WORK, WISHED THE TWR 'GOOD NIGHT,' MADE NO REQUESTS OR INQUIRIES. EVEN THOUGH ALL DEP POINTS WERE SCANNED THE ACFT AT THE INTXN WAS NOT OBSERVED. HAD THE WORD 'INTXN' BEEN USED OR POS AND HOLD AFTER DARK REGS BEEN UNDERSTOOD BY THE PA32 PLTS (THEY WERE UNAWARE THAT POS AND HOLD AFTER DARK AT AN INTXN IS NOT AUTH), THEY WOULD HAVE RAISED A VERIFICATION. ATC HAS BEEN EDUCATED TO THIS RULE, HAVE THE PLTS?

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.