Narrative:

Taxied to hold short runway 30. Tower cleared us for takeoff, but captain hesitated due to aircraft on final about 1/2-3/4 mi out. Tower stated that the aircraft on final was to execute a go around and we were now cleared for immediate takeoff. It didn't appear that the aircraft would go around, so I didn't taxi onto the runway, but continued to hold short. Small aircraft then landed (full stop) on runway 30. Tower didn't seem too concerned at all, but explained that the light civil aircraft had executed the 'option.' significant contributing factor: frequency assignment. At lgb common practice is for departing aircraft on runway 30 to utilize 120.5, while arrs use 119.4. If both aircraft had been on common frequency, the problem would have been resolved earlier. This is the second time I've been involved in a potential runway conflict at lgb in 2 yrs. Both cases involved a light aircraft operation west/O tower clearance. Both cases involved being on separate VHF frequencys. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states problem is use of 2 frequencys--one for arrs and one for departures. If on a common frequency each aircraft would know what other traffic is doing. Second situation of confusion with landing traffic and ground traffic at lgb for this crew. A great deal of training takes place at lgb. Usually traffic is separated by commercial aircraft on runways 30 and GA traffic on runways 25. Instrument approachs, however, are practiced on runway 30.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TWR USING 2 FREQS.

Narrative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

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.