Narrative:

Fpr is equipped with two parallel runways. This morning the runways in use were 28L for landing at the airport and making a full stop; and 28R for traffic pattern practice. My student and I had been using 28R but needed to return to the main portion of the airport (28R is on the airport property; but is not connected via taxiways to the rest of the airport). At the time; there were five aircraft using 28R. After being cleared for takeoff; we advised the tower that we were on a right downwind for 28 left and were told to 'continue'. No specification of what to continue followed. We thought this meant to continue our downwind; which we did. However; tower thought this mean to continue a normal traffic pattern. This was the first point of confusion. Normally; when giving an instruction to 'continue'; the instructing authority follows with specific actions. In this case; none were given. We continued our downwind until tower advised us to turn base; at which time we announced that we were turning base for 28L. Unknown to us; tower already had another airplane on a left base for 28L. We converged with the other aircraft; however with the sun in our eyes; we never saw the other airplane until it appeared right in front of us; already turned on final. I estimate our separation to have been approximately 400 ft. There were several factors which led to this incident: 1. Tower did not understand our intention to return to the main part of the airport; which would involve use of runway 28L. 2. Tower did not issue appropriate instructions. In addition to the use of 'continue' without specifics; tower also cleared us for takeoff and right traffic; but did not specify a runway. 3. Tower mis-identified or misheard our intentions and understanding to proceed to 28L; despite being told twice while we were in the traffic pattern; and attempted to continue managing us as part of the student traffic on 28R. 4. Congestion: fpr was experiencing a large volume of traffic this morning. In addition to arrivals and departures at the main portion of the airport; there were five aircraft using the smaller runway 28R for pattern practice. In my opinion; this is entirely too many aircraft for the practice field and can quickly lead to a loss of situational awareness by the tower crew. It creates an undue burden on the controllers to manage the activities of so many student pilots (who do not always do as instructed or do not always understand) in such a small area.at other airports with practice runways; patterns are limited to three aircraft. Any additional aircraft are turned away and advised to go to a different airport. It would be advisable for the tower to do the same at this airport. If the traffic volume becomes too great; aircraft simply wanting to do touch and goes should be turned away; and traffic thinned by asking those in the practice pattern to either go to a different airport (there are 3 within 30 NM of fpr); or return to the main airport to terminate their flight. 5. Confusion: this is a direct result of the high traffic load. Confusion in the tower was not limited to just my aircraft and our intentions. It is further evidenced in the recording from this morning. At one point; tower issues instructions to an aircraft in flight; only for the aircraft to respond that it is in fact still holding short of the runway; and not actually airborne. Again; [there were] too many aircraft or not enough controllers to handle the volume of traffic.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An Instructor who had been working with a student on Runway 28R at FPR reported a near miss with another aircraft after the Local Controller misunderstood his request for landing Runway 28L with other traffic inbound to Runway 28L.

Narrative: FPR is equipped with two parallel runways. This morning the runways in use were 28L for landing at the airport and making a full stop; and 28R for traffic pattern practice. My student and I had been using 28R but needed to return to the main portion of the airport (28R is on the airport property; but is not connected via taxiways to the rest of the airport). At the time; there were five aircraft using 28R. After being cleared for takeoff; we advised the Tower that we were on a right downwind for 28 Left and were told to 'continue'. No specification of what to continue followed. We thought this meant to continue our downwind; which we did. However; Tower thought this mean to continue a normal traffic pattern. This was the first point of confusion. Normally; when giving an instruction to 'continue'; the instructing authority follows with specific actions. In this case; none were given. We continued our downwind until Tower advised us to turn base; at which time we announced that we were turning base for 28L. Unknown to us; Tower already had another airplane on a left base for 28L. We converged with the other aircraft; however with the sun in our eyes; we never saw the other airplane until it appeared right in front of us; already turned on final. I estimate our separation to have been approximately 400 FT. There were several factors which led to this incident: 1. Tower did not understand our intention to return to the main part of the airport; which would involve use of Runway 28L. 2. Tower did not issue appropriate instructions. In addition to the use of 'continue' without specifics; Tower also cleared us for takeoff and right traffic; but did not specify a runway. 3. Tower mis-identified or misheard our intentions and understanding to proceed to 28L; despite being told twice while we were in the traffic pattern; and attempted to continue managing us as part of the student traffic on 28R. 4. Congestion: FPR was experiencing a large volume of traffic this morning. In addition to arrivals and departures at the main portion of the airport; there were five aircraft using the smaller Runway 28R for pattern practice. In my opinion; this is entirely too many aircraft for the practice field and can quickly lead to a loss of situational awareness by the Tower crew. It creates an undue burden on the controllers to manage the activities of so many student pilots (who do not always do as instructed or do not always understand) in such a small area.At other airports with practice runways; patterns are limited to three aircraft. Any additional aircraft are turned away and advised to go to a different airport. It would be advisable for the Tower to do the same at this airport. If the traffic volume becomes too great; aircraft simply wanting to do touch and goes should be turned away; and traffic thinned by asking those in the practice pattern to either go to a different airport (there are 3 within 30 NM of FPR); or return to the main airport to terminate their flight. 5. Confusion: This is a direct result of the high traffic load. Confusion in the Tower was not limited to just my aircraft and our intentions. It is further evidenced in the recording from this morning. At one point; Tower issues instructions to an aircraft in flight; only for the aircraft to respond that it is in fact still holding short of the runway; and not actually airborne. Again; [there were] too many aircraft or not enough controllers to handle the volume of traffic.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.