Narrative:

While landing on runway 25 at sba we executed a go around to avoid a collision with a C172 taking off on runway 15. We were cleared to land and were in the flair when we heard the tower controller say, 'cessna so and so, stop.' the first officer and jump seat rider both acquired the cessna visually. As PF, I initiated a go around as soon as 'go around' was stated. I then acquired the cessna visually momentarily as it was on its takeoff roll to our right and front. The first officer stated that he followed the cessna visually as it went beneath us. As a crew we all agreed that we missed the cessna over the intersection of the runways by approximately 300 ft vertically and that had we not executed a go around we would have collided. We landed without further incident. Later, while speaking by phone, the tower stated that the cessna was cleared 'into position and hold' only. The go around was evasive, but not aggressive in nature. The go around was somewhat unusual in that we were in the final stages of the landing flair just prior to touchdown when we executed the go around. This incident calls question to the validity of the 'position and hold' clearance when used on intersecting runways. Also, in this case the extra set of eyes that the jump seat rider brought to the crew underscored a positive reason for allowing a jump seat rider.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LTT COMMUTER CREW AND C172 HAD AN NMAC AT SBA WHEN THE C172 PLT TOOK OFF WITHOUT CLRNC.

Narrative: WHILE LNDG ON RWY 25 AT SBA WE EXECUTED A GAR TO AVOID A COLLISION WITH A C172 TAKING OFF ON RWY 15. WE WERE CLRED TO LAND AND WERE IN THE FLAIR WHEN WE HEARD THE TWR CTLR SAY, 'CESSNA SO AND SO, STOP.' THE FO AND JUMP SEAT RIDER BOTH ACQUIRED THE CESSNA VISUALLY. AS PF, I INITIATED A GAR AS SOON AS 'GO AROUND' WAS STATED. I THEN ACQUIRED THE CESSNA VISUALLY MOMENTARILY AS IT WAS ON ITS TKOF ROLL TO OUR R AND FRONT. THE FO STATED THAT HE FOLLOWED THE CESSNA VISUALLY AS IT WENT BENEATH US. AS A CREW WE ALL AGREED THAT WE MISSED THE CESSNA OVER THE INTXN OF THE RWYS BY APPROX 300 FT VERTLY AND THAT HAD WE NOT EXECUTED A GAR WE WOULD HAVE COLLIDED. WE LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. LATER, WHILE SPEAKING BY PHONE, THE TWR STATED THAT THE CESSNA WAS CLRED 'INTO POS AND HOLD' ONLY. THE GAR WAS EVASIVE, BUT NOT AGGRESSIVE IN NATURE. THE GAR WAS SOMEWHAT UNUSUAL IN THAT WE WERE IN THE FINAL STAGES OF THE LNDG FLAIR JUST PRIOR TO TOUCHDOWN WHEN WE EXECUTED THE GAR. THIS INCIDENT CALLS QUESTION TO THE VALIDITY OF THE 'POS AND HOLD' CLRNC WHEN USED ON INTERSECTING RWYS. ALSO, IN THIS CASE THE EXTRA SET OF EYES THAT THE JUMP SEAT RIDER BROUGHT TO THE CREW UNDERSCORED A POSITIVE REASON FOR ALLOWING A JUMP SEAT RIDER.

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.