Narrative:

I served as the first officer of an air carrier which was attempting to depart santiago, dominican republic (mdst). The other crew member was the captain. IMC conditions existed with rain. We were cleared to back track runway 11 and to line up and wait for takeoff clearance. Once we reached the end and were in position for takeoff, tower told us there would be a 3 min delay for takeoff and to continue holding position for takeoff clearance. At this time the captain decided to turn the aircraft 90 degree to the runway with the nose pointing toward the centerline of the runway. Shortly after this the controller cleared aircraft Y for the VOR DME approach. We noted the aircraft on our TCAS at 10 DME and closing. At this time the captain reported to the tower that we were on the approach end of runway 11 waiting for takeoff clearance. The tower responded 'roger.' the aircraft Y continued the approach towards runway 11. Again, the captain reported to tower that we were sitting on the approach end of runway 11 and questioned tower if he was going to allow aircraft Y to land while we were on the runway. The tower said 'no he would not let the aircraft Y land.' we continued to wait for takeoff clearance. The approaching aircraft called 4 mi final and tower told aircraft Y to continue. Now the captain in spanish asks the tower does he realize we are on the runway and aircraft Y is on short final for the same runway? The tower replied 'yes, I understand.' the captain again said to tower 'we are on the approach end of runway 11 and aircraft Y is on short final for the same runway, do you understand? The tower replied 'yes, I understand.' then aircraft Y reported he was committed to land. Seconds after, the aircraft flew across our nose directly above our aircraft and proceeded to land. Once aircraft Y cleared the runway, we were given our clearance to depart. Never once did the tower say to the approaching aircraft to go around or to execute a missed approach and he never cleared aircraft Y to land. There was no emergency issued by aircraft Y or tower. The landing of the approaching aircraft was a potential disaster which could have cost many innocent peoples lives, not to mention it violated regulations. If we had left our aircraft lined up on the centerline of the runway, the landing aircraft could have quite possibly clipped our tail. There was no room at the end of the runway for us to exit. The frustration level in our cockpit was high and attempting to exit the runway without running our aircraft into unleveled dirt and rocks was not a viable option. Attempting a high speed taxi back down to the first available taxiway to exit the runway was discussed between the captain and myself but seemed even more dangerous than holding our current position, nor did we have clearance from the tower to do so. Truthfully, we questioned the state of mind of the controller. There needs to be a taxiway leading to both ends of the runway in mdst large enough to allow a commercial aircraft to exit the runway, turn around and hold short behind hold short lines that lead back on to the runway. I would fault the tower for allowing aircraft Y to continue the approach while knowing we were sitting on the approach end of the active runway. Secondly I would fault the landing aircraft for landing without a landing clearance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATR42 FLC EXPERIENCE LAND OVER WHILE IN POSITION FOR TKOF ON RWY 11 AT MDST.

Narrative: I SERVED AS THE FO OF AN ACR WHICH WAS ATTEMPTING TO DEPART SANTIAGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (MDST). THE OTHER CREW MEMBER WAS THE CAPT. IMC CONDITIONS EXISTED WITH RAIN. WE WERE CLRED TO BACK TRACK RWY 11 AND TO LINE UP AND WAIT FOR TKOF CLRNC. ONCE WE REACHED THE END AND WERE IN POS FOR TKOF, TWR TOLD US THERE WOULD BE A 3 MIN DELAY FOR TKOF AND TO CONTINUE HOLDING POS FOR TKOF CLRNC. AT THIS TIME THE CAPT DECIDED TO TURN THE ACFT 90 DEG TO THE RWY WITH THE NOSE POINTING TOWARD THE CENTERLINE OF THE RWY. SHORTLY AFTER THIS THE CTLR CLRED ACFT Y FOR THE VOR DME APCH. WE NOTED THE ACFT ON OUR TCAS AT 10 DME AND CLOSING. AT THIS TIME THE CAPT RPTED TO THE TWR THAT WE WERE ON THE APCH END OF RWY 11 WAITING FOR TKOF CLRNC. THE TWR RESPONDED 'ROGER.' THE ACFT Y CONTINUED THE APCH TOWARDS RWY 11. AGAIN, THE CAPT RPTED TO TWR THAT WE WERE SITTING ON THE APCH END OF RWY 11 AND QUESTIONED TWR IF HE WAS GOING TO ALLOW ACFT Y TO LAND WHILE WE WERE ON THE RWY. THE TWR SAID 'NO HE WOULD NOT LET THE ACFT Y LAND.' WE CONTINUED TO WAIT FOR TKOF CLRNC. THE APCHING ACFT CALLED 4 MI FINAL AND TWR TOLD ACFT Y TO CONTINUE. NOW THE CAPT IN SPANISH ASKS THE TWR DOES HE REALIZE WE ARE ON THE RWY AND ACFT Y IS ON SHORT FINAL FOR THE SAME RWY? THE TWR REPLIED 'YES, I UNDERSTAND.' THE CAPT AGAIN SAID TO TWR 'WE ARE ON THE APCH END OF RWY 11 AND ACFT Y IS ON SHORT FINAL FOR THE SAME RWY, DO YOU UNDERSTAND? THE TWR REPLIED 'YES, I UNDERSTAND.' THEN ACFT Y RPTED HE WAS COMMITTED TO LAND. SECONDS AFTER, THE ACFT FLEW ACROSS OUR NOSE DIRECTLY ABOVE OUR ACFT AND PROCEEDED TO LAND. ONCE ACFT Y CLRED THE RWY, WE WERE GIVEN OUR CLRNC TO DEPART. NEVER ONCE DID THE TWR SAY TO THE APCHING ACFT TO GO AROUND OR TO EXECUTE A MISSED APCH AND HE NEVER CLRED ACFT Y TO LAND. THERE WAS NO EMER ISSUED BY ACFT Y OR TWR. THE LNDG OF THE APCHING ACFT WAS A POTENTIAL DISASTER WHICH COULD HAVE COST MANY INNOCENT PEOPLES LIVES, NOT TO MENTION IT VIOLATED REGULATIONS. IF WE HAD LEFT OUR ACFT LINED UP ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE RWY, THE LNDG ACFT COULD HAVE QUITE POSSIBLY CLIPPED OUR TAIL. THERE WAS NO ROOM AT THE END OF THE RWY FOR US TO EXIT. THE FRUSTRATION LEVEL IN OUR COCKPIT WAS HIGH AND ATTEMPTING TO EXIT THE RWY WITHOUT RUNNING OUR ACFT INTO UNLEVELED DIRT AND ROCKS WAS NOT A VIABLE OPTION. ATTEMPTING A HIGH SPEED TAXI BACK DOWN TO THE FIRST AVAILABLE TXWY TO EXIT THE RWY WAS DISCUSSED BTWN THE CAPT AND MYSELF BUT SEEMED EVEN MORE DANGEROUS THAN HOLDING OUR CURRENT POS, NOR DID WE HAVE CLRNC FROM THE TWR TO DO SO. TRUTHFULLY, WE QUESTIONED THE STATE OF MIND OF THE CTLR. THERE NEEDS TO BE A TXWY LEADING TO BOTH ENDS OF THE RWY IN MDST LARGE ENOUGH TO ALLOW A COMMERCIAL ACFT TO EXIT THE RWY, TURN AROUND AND HOLD SHORT BEHIND HOLD SHORT LINES THAT LEAD BACK ON TO THE RWY. I WOULD FAULT THE TWR FOR ALLOWING ACFT Y TO CONTINUE THE APCH WHILE KNOWING WE WERE SITTING ON THE APCH END OF THE ACTIVE RWY. SECONDLY I WOULD FAULT THE LNDG ACFT FOR LNDG WITHOUT A LNDG CLRNC.

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.