GA aircraft on short base to final performs a go around when reporter's PA34 is on the takeoff roll ...

Attributes
ACN	585572
Time
Date	200306
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : uyf.airport
State Reference	OH
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 700
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	PA-34-200 Seneca I
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	ground : taxi ground : takeoff roll
Flight Plan	None
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	PA-28 Cherokee/Archer II/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around
Route In Use	approach : traffic pattern
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : multi engine
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 75 flight time total : 1430 flight time type : 50
ASRS Report	585572
Person 2
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Events
Anomaly	conflict : ground less severe incursion : runway non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb other other : obs 3
Resolutory Action	flight crew : executed go around
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 4000 vertical : 700
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Environmental Factor
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

I was holding short of the active runway, checked the final approach, no traffic. I was aware of 1 airplane in the pattern who had announced downwind. I looked on the downwind, no traffic. I assumed they were just turning downwind. As I crossed the hold short line, I noticed the 'downwind' airplane starting his base turn. It still appeared to be no factor, but closer than I like, so I expedited my takeoff rather than stop past the hold short and risk a technical runway incursion. As I climbed out I heard that the other airplane went around. This surprised me because it really appeared to be no factor, yes closer than I like, but no factor. It still bothered me that I caused a pilot to go around. Even if it appeared to be no factor to me, this pilot exercised his judgement and went around. I commend this pilot for deciding to go around. I talked to another pilot who happened to be there at the time, and he said it really didn't look that close to him either. He thought that the other pilot was a student, and might have gone around because he was too high on final. Whatever the case, this other pilot acted more conservatively and hence, more safely than I did. What we can learn from this: 1) you can't assume it. You must see it. If you find yourself assuming in a situation where you really should be seeing, stop, or just slow down long enough to 'resolve' your assumption. 2) something that is 'no factor' to 1 pilot, may appear to be 'a factor' to another pilot. Regardless of relative experience, if that is the case here, I have to examine my actions for possible complacency or over confidence.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA ACFT ON SHORT BASE TO FINAL PERFORMS A GAR WHEN RPTR'S PA34 IS ON THE TKOF ROLL AT UYF, OH.

Narrative: I WAS HOLDING SHORT OF THE ACTIVE RWY, CHKED THE FINAL APCH, NO TFC. I WAS AWARE OF 1 AIRPLANE IN THE PATTERN WHO HAD ANNOUNCED DOWNWIND. I LOOKED ON THE DOWNWIND, NO TFC. I ASSUMED THEY WERE JUST TURNING DOWNWIND. AS I CROSSED THE HOLD SHORT LINE, I NOTICED THE 'DOWNWIND' AIRPLANE STARTING HIS BASE TURN. IT STILL APPEARED TO BE NO FACTOR, BUT CLOSER THAN I LIKE, SO I EXPEDITED MY TKOF RATHER THAN STOP PAST THE HOLD SHORT AND RISK A TECHNICAL RWY INCURSION. AS I CLBED OUT I HEARD THAT THE OTHER AIRPLANE WENT AROUND. THIS SURPRISED ME BECAUSE IT REALLY APPEARED TO BE NO FACTOR, YES CLOSER THAN I LIKE, BUT NO FACTOR. IT STILL BOTHERED ME THAT I CAUSED A PLT TO GO AROUND. EVEN IF IT APPEARED TO BE NO FACTOR TO ME, THIS PLT EXERCISED HIS JUDGEMENT AND WENT AROUND. I COMMEND THIS PLT FOR DECIDING TO GO AROUND. I TALKED TO ANOTHER PLT WHO HAPPENED TO BE THERE AT THE TIME, AND HE SAID IT REALLY DIDN'T LOOK THAT CLOSE TO HIM EITHER. HE THOUGHT THAT THE OTHER PLT WAS A STUDENT, AND MIGHT HAVE GONE AROUND BECAUSE HE WAS TOO HIGH ON FINAL. WHATEVER THE CASE, THIS OTHER PLT ACTED MORE CONSERVATIVELY AND HENCE, MORE SAFELY THAN I DID. WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM THIS: 1) YOU CAN'T ASSUME IT. YOU MUST SEE IT. IF YOU FIND YOURSELF ASSUMING IN A SIT WHERE YOU REALLY SHOULD BE SEEING, STOP, OR JUST SLOW DOWN LONG ENOUGH TO 'RESOLVE' YOUR ASSUMPTION. 2) SOMETHING THAT IS 'NO FACTOR' TO 1 PLT, MAY APPEAR TO BE 'A FACTOR' TO ANOTHER PLT. REGARDLESS OF RELATIVE EXPERIENCE, IF THAT IS THE CASE HERE, I HAVE TO EXAMINE MY ACTIONS FOR POSSIBLE COMPLACENCY OR OVER CONFIDENCE.

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.

GA aircraft on short base to final performs a go around when reporter's PA34 is on the takeoff roll at uyf, oh.