A B742 crew landed at sequ while departing aircraft was still on the runway.

Attributes
ACN	530702
Time
Date	200111
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sequ.airport
State Reference	FO
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Weather Elements	Fog
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B747-200
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 295
Flight Phase	landing : roll
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tower : sequ.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	F28 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : takeoff roll
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 1800 flight time total : 16700 flight time type : 900
ASRS Report	530702
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : flight engineer technician : airframe technician : powerplant
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 5000 flight time type : 1300
ASRS Report	530703
Events
Anomaly	incursion : runway non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : landed as precaution
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	horizontal : 3000
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Environmental Factor Airport ATC Human Performance ATC Facility Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Quito tower cleared aircraft Y, an F28, into position for takeoff in spanish. Our crew was unaware of this as we were on final segment of ILS approach. Fog was obscuring the runway from our vantage point and we were told to report the middle marker. At the middle marker, we saw the aircraft (F28) approximately 2000 ft down the runway accelerating past 80 KTS. At approximately 100 ft ATC gave us landing clearance while the F28 was still rolling. We advised to the tower we were unable to execute a go around safely due to terrain restrs, and the SID/missed approach procedure being identical. The crew elected to continue the landing while the F28 was still on the runway. We felt that our light landing weight (198000 kilograms) we would have been in a safer situation with 2000-3000 ft separation on the runway, in the unlikely event of an abort by the F28. A normal landing resulted with no further events. F28 continued takeoff without incident. Upon conference with control tower, F28 was cleared for takeoff while we called the OM. Aircraft Y apparently delayed takeoff with no ATC communication. Language may have been factor. Communications should have been in english. Supplemental information from acn 530703: possible solutions, that all communication should have been in english. We could have been given a go around sooner, with aircraft Y being told to abort takeoff. The F28 should not have delayed their takeoff roll, but once they did they should have had takeoff clearance canceled.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B742 CREW LANDED AT SEQU WHILE DEPARTING ACFT WAS STILL ON THE RWY.

Narrative: QUITO TWR CLRED ACFT Y, AN F28, INTO POS FOR TKOF IN SPANISH. OUR CREW WAS UNAWARE OF THIS AS WE WERE ON FINAL SEGMENT OF ILS APCH. FOG WAS OBSCURING THE RWY FROM OUR VANTAGE POINT AND WE WERE TOLD TO RPT THE MIDDLE MARKER. AT THE MIDDLE MARKER, WE SAW THE ACFT (F28) APPROX 2000 FT DOWN THE RWY ACCELERATING PAST 80 KTS. AT APPROX 100 FT ATC GAVE US LNDG CLRNC WHILE THE F28 WAS STILL ROLLING. WE ADVISED TO THE TWR WE WERE UNABLE TO EXECUTE A GAR SAFELY DUE TO TERRAIN RESTRS, AND THE SID/MISSED APCH PROC BEING IDENTICAL. THE CREW ELECTED TO CONTINUE THE LNDG WHILE THE F28 WAS STILL ON THE RWY. WE FELT THAT OUR LIGHT LNDG WT (198000 KILOGRAMS) WE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A SAFER SIT WITH 2000-3000 FT SEPARATION ON THE RWY, IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT OF AN ABORT BY THE F28. A NORMAL LNDG RESULTED WITH NO FURTHER EVENTS. F28 CONTINUED TKOF WITHOUT INCIDENT. UPON CONFERENCE WITH CTL TWR, F28 WAS CLRED FOR TKOF WHILE WE CALLED THE OM. ACFT Y APPARENTLY DELAYED TKOF WITH NO ATC COM. LANGUAGE MAY HAVE BEEN FACTOR. COMS SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN ENGLISH. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 530703: POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS, THAT ALL COM SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN ENGLISH. WE COULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN A GAR SOONER, WITH ACFT Y BEING TOLD TO ABORT TKOF. THE F28 SHOULD NOT HAVE DELAYED THEIR TKOF ROLL, BUT ONCE THEY DID THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD TKOF CLRNC CANCELED.

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.