Narrative:

We were preparing for departure on an IFR flight plan. We tuned in and received the XA502 ATIS, runway 9R in use. After receiving our clearance we contacted ground control for taxi instructions. The controller told us to taxi to runway 9R and asking if we would accept an intersection departure with 4200' available, we agreed we would. As we taxied on the 9R parallel taxiway an airliner departed on 9R, and another was on the opposite side of the runway taxiing for the full length. Another was on long final as we could see landing lights way out. We called the tower for departure instructions, advising we could use either intersection for departure (runway 36 and its parallel both cross runway 9R and are accessible as you approach on the taxiway wbound). The tower cleared us for takeoff from the runway 36 intersection, we entered runway 36 and turned east on 9R and departed, to be informed as we were airborne that we were using 9R. (Both of us thought that to be a strange comment). Then told to contact departure, turn to 360 degree. After some thought we now believe the controller wanted us to depart runway 36, but this plan was never discussed with us, and we feel deceived. Further to say if it had not been great visibility, and this occurred in instrument conditions this situation could develop into a very serious problem with unknown consequences. Normally ATIS information will state if other runway's are being used or it will be discussed between pilot/controller to remove all doubt about the plan. Maybe ATIS information should be consistent as some airport's tell all, and others tell some information.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THOUGHT CLEARED TKOF RWY 9 FROM 36 INTERSECTION. CLEARED TKOF RWY 36 FROM INTERSECTION.

Narrative: WE WERE PREPARING FOR DEPARTURE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN. WE TUNED IN AND RECEIVED THE XA502 ATIS, RWY 9R IN USE. AFTER RECEIVING OUR CLRNC WE CONTACTED GND CTL FOR TAXI INSTRUCTIONS. THE CTLR TOLD US TO TAXI TO RWY 9R AND ASKING IF WE WOULD ACCEPT AN INTERSECTION DEPARTURE WITH 4200' AVAILABLE, WE AGREED WE WOULD. AS WE TAXIED ON THE 9R PARALLEL TAXIWAY AN AIRLINER DEPARTED ON 9R, AND ANOTHER WAS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE RWY TAXIING FOR THE FULL LENGTH. ANOTHER WAS ON LONG FINAL AS WE COULD SEE LANDING LIGHTS WAY OUT. WE CALLED THE TWR FOR DEPARTURE INSTRUCTIONS, ADVISING WE COULD USE EITHER INTERSECTION FOR DEPARTURE (RWY 36 AND ITS PARALLEL BOTH CROSS RWY 9R AND ARE ACCESSIBLE AS YOU APCH ON THE TXWY WBOUND). THE TWR CLRED US FOR TKOF FROM THE RWY 36 INTERSECTION, WE ENTERED RWY 36 AND TURNED EAST ON 9R AND DEPARTED, TO BE INFORMED AS WE WERE AIRBORNE THAT WE WERE USING 9R. (BOTH OF US THOUGHT THAT TO BE A STRANGE COMMENT). THEN TOLD TO CONTACT DEP, TURN TO 360 DEG. AFTER SOME THOUGHT WE NOW BELIEVE THE CTLR WANTED US TO DEPART RWY 36, BUT THIS PLAN WAS NEVER DISCUSSED WITH US, AND WE FEEL DECEIVED. FURTHER TO SAY IF IT HAD NOT BEEN GREAT VISIBILITY, AND THIS OCCURRED IN INSTRUMENT CONDITIONS THIS SITUATION COULD DEVELOP INTO A VERY SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH UNKNOWN CONSEQUENCES. NORMALLY ATIS INFORMATION WILL STATE IF OTHER RWY'S ARE BEING USED OR IT WILL BE DISCUSSED BETWEEN PLT/CTLR TO REMOVE ALL DOUBT ABOUT THE PLAN. MAYBE ATIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE CONSISTENT AS SOME ARPT'S TELL ALL, AND OTHERS TELL SOME INFORMATION.

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.