Narrative:

I arrived at uni airport approximately XA00 on may/xa/98 on an IFR flight plan from cle. In the final stages of the flight, I was handed off from columbus approach to huntington approach, with whom I canceled IFR some 15 mi from the field, which I had in sight. Continuing to the runway VFR, upon calling position in the pattern, unicom (unknown) advised there was a plane which landed gear up on the end on runway 7 (sitting on the '25' at departure end of runway 7) and landing would not be a problem. I saw subject plane, it was well away. I landed and turned off well downfield. Some 15 mins later, I departed on runway 25. I taxied well down runway (started my takeoff roll some 300 ft past the subject aircraft) and departed off runway 25. Upon calling huntington approach for my clearance to cle (IFR) the controller asked if I departed runway 25. He advised same was closed after I advised him of the fact that the aircraft was disabled on the runway. No NOTAM was issued at that time, and before takeoff I spoke to the airport manager and he suggested in answer to my query that if I taxied around and away from the crashed plane, it was ok to take off. At no time was there any conflict caused by my actions. Other aircraft landed and took off before and after me. Upon being handed off to ZID, I advised them of the aircraft on the runway. The controller called me back to advise he had just issued a NOTAM based on my notification. Time was approximately XC50. Issue: I don't wish to believe that I broke any regulations by my action in taking off when I did. The runway was not closed during my takeoff. The NOTAM informing of the incident was issued upon my advising the center of the issue.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN SEL SMA LANDED AND TOOK OFF ON A RWY ON WHICH A DISABLED ACFT WAS STRANDED AT THE SIDE AND END OF THE RWY. THE UNICOM OPERATOR ADVISED DURING LNDG ADVISORY OF THE STRANDED ACFT AND THAT IT SHOULD NOT PRESENT A LNDG PROB. THE ARPT MGR SUBSEQUENTLY SUGGESTED A TKOF ON THE SAME RWY AS LONG AS THE RPTR TAXIED AWAY FROM THE STRANDED ACFT. PLT GAVE NOTAM INFO TO ARTCC AFTER TKOF.

Narrative: I ARRIVED AT UNI ARPT APPROX XA00 ON MAY/XA/98 ON AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM CLE. IN THE FINAL STAGES OF THE FLT, I WAS HANDED OFF FROM COLUMBUS APCH TO HUNTINGTON APCH, WITH WHOM I CANCELED IFR SOME 15 MI FROM THE FIELD, WHICH I HAD IN SIGHT. CONTINUING TO THE RWY VFR, UPON CALLING POS IN THE PATTERN, UNICOM (UNKNOWN) ADVISED THERE WAS A PLANE WHICH LANDED GEAR UP ON THE END ON RWY 7 (SITTING ON THE '25' AT DEP END OF RWY 7) AND LNDG WOULD NOT BE A PROB. I SAW SUBJECT PLANE, IT WAS WELL AWAY. I LANDED AND TURNED OFF WELL DOWNFIELD. SOME 15 MINS LATER, I DEPARTED ON RWY 25. I TAXIED WELL DOWN RWY (STARTED MY TKOF ROLL SOME 300 FT PAST THE SUBJECT ACFT) AND DEPARTED OFF RWY 25. UPON CALLING HUNTINGTON APCH FOR MY CLRNC TO CLE (IFR) THE CTLR ASKED IF I DEPARTED RWY 25. HE ADVISED SAME WAS CLOSED AFTER I ADVISED HIM OF THE FACT THAT THE ACFT WAS DISABLED ON THE RWY. NO NOTAM WAS ISSUED AT THAT TIME, AND BEFORE TKOF I SPOKE TO THE ARPT MGR AND HE SUGGESTED IN ANSWER TO MY QUERY THAT IF I TAXIED AROUND AND AWAY FROM THE CRASHED PLANE, IT WAS OK TO TAKE OFF. AT NO TIME WAS THERE ANY CONFLICT CAUSED BY MY ACTIONS. OTHER ACFT LANDED AND TOOK OFF BEFORE AND AFTER ME. UPON BEING HANDED OFF TO ZID, I ADVISED THEM OF THE ACFT ON THE RWY. THE CTLR CALLED ME BACK TO ADVISE HE HAD JUST ISSUED A NOTAM BASED ON MY NOTIFICATION. TIME WAS APPROX XC50. ISSUE: I DON'T WISH TO BELIEVE THAT I BROKE ANY REGS BY MY ACTION IN TAKING OFF WHEN I DID. THE RWY WAS NOT CLOSED DURING MY TKOF. THE NOTAM INFORMING OF THE INCIDENT WAS ISSUED UPON MY ADVISING THE CTR OF THE ISSUE.

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.