Narrative:

After receiving IFR release via radio from charleston TRACON, we transmitted our intent to depart runway 19. At this time, another unknown type aircraft announced on a left base to runway 28. I thought I heard a second aircraft call inbound at the same time so I transmitted 'aircraft landing beckley say your position.' an aircraft responded on a 2 mi final to runway 28. I responded we were holding short of runway 19 and requested we advise down and clear. From this time until after we were airborne, no other xmissions were heard on frequency. After 2-3 mins, I again requested the landing aircraft's position. No response was received. I again requested the aircraft landing bkw report down and clear and restated our position and intent. About 1 min later the co-captain, PNF, again stated our position and intentions and requested the landing aircraft's position with no response received. Myself and the PNF discussed the possibility that the aircraft had landed and parked without transmitting further. We had been monitoring our TCASII and had no target's displayed within 25 mi. Only runway 19 and a small portion of runway 28 either side of runway 19 are visible from the northern half of runway 19. We discussed our lack of comfort departing without seeing the landing aircraft first, but after 2 more unanswered calls we decided to take off. We made 2 more calls, one announcing taking the runway and one beginning our takeoff roll. We became airborne about 500 ft north of the runway intersection. As we crossed over the intersection, I observed the piper cub airborne off runway 28. At this time a loud and clear transmission was yelled over the frequency, 'hey unicom, did you know a learjet was taking off?' unicom replied 'negative,' also loud and clear. The aircraft then transmitted 'jeeze!' due to the type of aircraft, I believed it probable that even though he reported a 2 mi final approximately 4-5 mins prior, he had just completed a touch-and-go landing. I then transmitted the facts of all our pre-departure radio calls and requests and the lack of response. I told him we had to assume he had landed and parked with no further reports. He then said he had landed and used the restroom prior to this takeoff. At this time we realized this aircraft was not the same aircraft that we had been waiting on to land. Due to the performance differences and airborne position of the aircraft involved, there was no chance of an actual collision. If we had waited another 30 seconds to depart? It should be noted that the unicom operator is normally very attentive. His xmissions were loud and clear when we were airborne and the other aircraft had obviously been in contact with him. I confirmed with our company maintenance that the radio we used is connected to the upper antenna. It should be noted we used the #2 radio, which is connected to the lower antenna to request and receive our IFR release via the rco. Together this seems to indicate a 'dead spot' for the unicom frequency at the hold short point, as well as the north portion of runway 19. This may be caused by the terrain. Other areas may also be affected on the airport as well. This situation should be investigated. Consideration to relocating the unicom antenna and issuing a NOTAM should be given.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN LR31 FLC HAS A TFC CONFLICT WITH A DEP PIPER CUB ON A CROSS RWY AFTER TRYING TO DETERMINE TFC FLOW WITH REPEATED CALLS ON CTAF FREQ AT BKW, WV.

Narrative: AFTER RECEIVING IFR RELEASE VIA RADIO FROM CHARLESTON TRACON, WE XMITTED OUR INTENT TO DEPART RWY 19. AT THIS TIME, ANOTHER UNKNOWN TYPE ACFT ANNOUNCED ON A L BASE TO RWY 28. I THOUGHT I HEARD A SECOND ACFT CALL INBOUND AT THE SAME TIME SO I XMITTED 'ACFT LNDG BECKLEY SAY YOUR POS.' AN ACFT RESPONDED ON A 2 MI FINAL TO RWY 28. I RESPONDED WE WERE HOLDING SHORT OF RWY 19 AND REQUESTED WE ADVISE DOWN AND CLR. FROM THIS TIME UNTIL AFTER WE WERE AIRBORNE, NO OTHER XMISSIONS WERE HEARD ON FREQ. AFTER 2-3 MINS, I AGAIN REQUESTED THE LNDG ACFT'S POS. NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED. I AGAIN REQUESTED THE ACFT LNDG BKW RPT DOWN AND CLR AND RESTATED OUR POS AND INTENT. ABOUT 1 MIN LATER THE CO-CAPT, PNF, AGAIN STATED OUR POS AND INTENTIONS AND REQUESTED THE LNDG ACFT'S POS WITH NO RESPONSE RECEIVED. MYSELF AND THE PNF DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE ACFT HAD LANDED AND PARKED WITHOUT XMITTING FURTHER. WE HAD BEEN MONITORING OUR TCASII AND HAD NO TARGET'S DISPLAYED WITHIN 25 MI. ONLY RWY 19 AND A SMALL PORTION OF RWY 28 EITHER SIDE OF RWY 19 ARE VISIBLE FROM THE NORTHERN HALF OF RWY 19. WE DISCUSSED OUR LACK OF COMFORT DEPARTING WITHOUT SEEING THE LNDG ACFT FIRST, BUT AFTER 2 MORE UNANSWERED CALLS WE DECIDED TO TAKE OFF. WE MADE 2 MORE CALLS, ONE ANNOUNCING TAKING THE RWY AND ONE BEGINNING OUR TKOF ROLL. WE BECAME AIRBORNE ABOUT 500 FT N OF THE RWY INTXN. AS WE CROSSED OVER THE INTXN, I OBSERVED THE PIPER CUB AIRBORNE OFF RWY 28. AT THIS TIME A LOUD AND CLR XMISSION WAS YELLED OVER THE FREQ, 'HEY UNICOM, DID YOU KNOW A LEARJET WAS TAKING OFF?' UNICOM REPLIED 'NEGATIVE,' ALSO LOUD AND CLR. THE ACFT THEN XMITTED 'JEEZE!' DUE TO THE TYPE OF ACFT, I BELIEVED IT PROBABLE THAT EVEN THOUGH HE RPTED A 2 MI FINAL APPROX 4-5 MINS PRIOR, HE HAD JUST COMPLETED A TOUCH-AND-GO LNDG. I THEN XMITTED THE FACTS OF ALL OUR PRE-DEP RADIO CALLS AND REQUESTS AND THE LACK OF RESPONSE. I TOLD HIM WE HAD TO ASSUME HE HAD LANDED AND PARKED WITH NO FURTHER RPTS. HE THEN SAID HE HAD LANDED AND USED THE RESTROOM PRIOR TO THIS TKOF. AT THIS TIME WE REALIZED THIS ACFT WAS NOT THE SAME ACFT THAT WE HAD BEEN WAITING ON TO LAND. DUE TO THE PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCES AND AIRBORNE POS OF THE ACFT INVOLVED, THERE WAS NO CHANCE OF AN ACTUAL COLLISION. IF WE HAD WAITED ANOTHER 30 SECONDS TO DEPART? IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE UNICOM OPERATOR IS NORMALLY VERY ATTENTIVE. HIS XMISSIONS WERE LOUD AND CLR WHEN WE WERE AIRBORNE AND THE OTHER ACFT HAD OBVIOUSLY BEEN IN CONTACT WITH HIM. I CONFIRMED WITH OUR COMPANY MAINT THAT THE RADIO WE USED IS CONNECTED TO THE UPPER ANTENNA. IT SHOULD BE NOTED WE USED THE #2 RADIO, WHICH IS CONNECTED TO THE LOWER ANTENNA TO REQUEST AND RECEIVE OUR IFR RELEASE VIA THE RCO. TOGETHER THIS SEEMS TO INDICATE A 'DEAD SPOT' FOR THE UNICOM FREQ AT THE HOLD SHORT POINT, AS WELL AS THE N PORTION OF RWY 19. THIS MAY BE CAUSED BY THE TERRAIN. OTHER AREAS MAY ALSO BE AFFECTED ON THE ARPT AS WELL. THIS SIT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED. CONSIDERATION TO RELOCATING THE UNICOM ANTENNA AND ISSUING A NOTAM SHOULD BE GIVEN.

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.