Narrative:

My student and I experienced a runway incursion through the 32L/22R intersection at cmi. We were flying the ILS 32 practice approach and did a touch-north-go through the intersection while another aircraft, aircraft Y was cleared for a touch-north-go on the intersecting runway 22R. As a result, we both passed through the intersection at the same time, with my plane passing 300FT overhead. After talking with the tower after the incident, we determined that miscommunication and confusion was at fault. On our approach, inside the final approach fix, we were asked if we wanted a touch-north-go out of our approach and we replied 'affirmative.' tower the stated, 'clear to land runway 32, hold short runway 22 and wait for release.' we fully readback the clearance. Approximately 20 seconds later tower then stated, 'aircraft X, continue missed approach, maintain 3000 ft turn right 90 degrees to intercept the 60 degree radial,' to hold at a fix. Through past experience, I interpreted this clearance as a touch-north-go and after that we were cleared to the holding fix. This however, was not what tower wanted us to do as they were expecting us to land, hold short, and then await a release. To prevent an incident like this from happening, I should have queried ATC about the clearance instead of assuming we were cleared for the touch-north-go. In addition I should have been more aware of the surrounding traffic that was practicing lndgs on the intersecting runway. Also, ATC should have been more specific in their clearance and not given any missed approach instructions until we were stopped on the runway and cleared for takeoff.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RWY INCURSION AND CRITICAL GND CONFLICT OCCURS AT THE JUNCTION ON RWY 22 AND RWY 32L WHEN A STUDENT PLT AND CFI MISINTERP THEIR MISSED APCH CLRNC FOR A LNDG CLRNC DURING ILS APCH TO RWY 32L AT CMI, IL.

Narrative: MY STUDENT AND I EXPERIENCED A RWY INCURSION THROUGH THE 32L/22R INTERSECTION AT CMI. WE WERE FLYING THE ILS 32 PRACTICE APCH AND DID A TOUCH-N-GO THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHILE ANOTHER ACFT, ACFT Y WAS CLRED FOR A TOUCH-N-GO ON THE INTERSECTING RWY 22R. AS A RESULT, WE BOTH PASSED THROUGH THE INTERSECTION AT THE SAME TIME, WITH MY PLANE PASSING 300FT OVERHEAD. AFTER TALKING WITH THE TWR AFTER THE INCIDENT, WE DETERMINED THAT MISCOMMUNICATION AND CONFUSION WAS AT FAULT. ON OUR APCH, INSIDE THE FINAL APCH FIX, WE WERE ASKED IF WE WANTED A TOUCH-N-GO OUT OF OUR APCH AND WE REPLIED 'AFFIRMATIVE.' TWR THE STATED, 'CLR TO LAND RWY 32, HOLD SHORT RWY 22 AND WAIT FOR RELEASE.' WE FULLY READBACK THE CLRNC. APPROX 20 SECS LATER TWR THEN STATED, 'ACFT X, CONTINUE MISSED APCH, MAINTAIN 3000 FT TURN R 90 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE 60 DEG RADIAL,' TO HOLD AT A FIX. THROUGH PAST EXPERIENCE, I INTERPRETED THIS CLRNC AS A TOUCH-N-GO AND AFTER THAT WE WERE CLRED TO THE HOLDING FIX. THIS HOWEVER, WAS NOT WHAT TWR WANTED US TO DO AS THEY WERE EXPECTING US TO LAND, HOLD SHORT, AND THEN AWAIT A RELEASE. TO PREVENT AN INCIDENT LIKE THIS FROM HAPPENING, I SHOULD HAVE QUERIED ATC ABOUT THE CLRNC INSTEAD OF ASSUMING WE WERE CLRED FOR THE TOUCH-N-GO. IN ADDITION I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE AWARE OF THE SURROUNDING TFC THAT WAS PRACTICING LNDGS ON THE INTERSECTING RWY. ALSO, ATC SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE SPECIFIC IN THEIR CLRNC AND NOT GIVEN ANY MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS UNTIL WE WERE STOPPED ON THE RWY AND CLRED FOR TAKEOFF.

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.