Near miss at CLT

[Dave Siciliano]

This simulation shows a runway incursion at Charlotte. Seems both planes were cleared: one for takeoff and one position and hold.

http://tinyurl.com/ylnx3f2

Joe Budge posted this on AvSig.

Best,

Dave

 

[ScottM]

Nothing near about that "near miss" That did miss! It was almost a near hit though!! YIKES!!

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Pilatus:
-did not catch that LC's P&H clearance did not include mention of an intersection departure as one would expect.
-did not read back "P&H 18L intersection Alpha" as required.
-I suspect; did not visually clear the runway before entering.

LC
-did not realize Pilatus was at an intersection. Not informed or missed message from GC.

What else?

 

[kkoran]

Lessons for pilots: Don't blindly trust ATC. Controllers, like pilots, occassionaly screw up. Keep your eyes and ears open. Was the Pilatus was on the local frequency when the RJ was cleared for takeoff? If so, why didn't he question the clearance. Did he look toward the approach end before entering the runway?

I hate to cram more into 7110.65, but when a controller clears an aircraft to position and hold at an intersection, they should have to state the intersection. In this case: "N409DR Runway 18L at Alpha, taxi into position and hold." Pilots would have to realize that if they should hold short and question the clearance if the controller doesn't state the intersection with a TIP clearance when the plane isn't at the approach end of the runway.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Pilatus:
-did not catch that LC's P&H clearance did not include mention of an intersection departure as one would expect.
-did not read back "P&H 18L intersection Alpha" as required.
-I suspect; did not visually clear the runway before entering.

LC
-did not realize Pilatus was at an intersection. Not informed or missed message from GC.

What else?

You're right on top of your game Dave! The Palatus was departing the GA area. 18L was the departure runway for all the airliners. I flew out of there over the holidays and had to taxi for a full length departure. Wonder if this incident affected that.
Towered cleared the RJ full length.
If I was making an intersection departure along an active that was probably busy, I'd sure be trying to monitor tower for situational awareness.
I don't think tower read the intersection clearance correctly when they gave him position and hold--would have to listen again. Pilatus pilot didn't call from where he was cleared onto the active as you said. Douglas is pretty flat, a look out the window may have helped.

But, he was cleared out onto the active. I can sure see how one can get caught up in pre-departure things like the clearance, departure instructions, etc and have their head down instead of eyes outside. The RJ could have picked up a clearance onto 18L also if monitoring tower, but they were pretty busy departing.

Tower operator choked on her words as the situation developed.

When I was leaving CLT, I was paranoid about taxiing correctly, getting the departure tuned in and we were given early turn out instructions. In the conga line with airliners in front and back of us, we really wanted to show a GA plane could do things right. I could see how someone could easily get overloaded. I had a capable fella in the right seat helping out.

Sure coulda happened to me.

Best,

Dave

 

[flyersfan31]

Position and hold always makes me nervous.

Position and hold at an intersection would make me reaaaally nervous.

 

[AdamZ]

As of a couple of years ago I have begun to position and hold by positioning my self on the runway at about a 60* angle to the runway so I can see whats comming behind me.

 

[roncachamp]

I hate to cram more into 7110.65, but when a controller clears an aircraft to position and hold at an intersection, they should have to state the intersection. In this case: "N409DR Runway 18L at Alpha, taxi into position and hold." Pilots would have to realize that if they should hold short and question the clearance if the controller doesn't state the intersection with a TIP clearance when the plane isn't at the approach end of the runway.

That's already been crammed into it, but in order to do that, the controller has to know the aircraft is at an intersection. There were three aircraft in sequence behind JIA390 for full length departure. Right after the controller cleared JIA390 for takeoff she instructed N409DR to position and hold. It appears to me she believed N409DR was the aircraft immediately behind JIA390 for departure full length.


3-7-1. GROUND TRAFFIC MOVEMENT

Issue by radio or directional light signals specific
instructions which approve or disapprove the
movement of aircraft, vehicles, equipment, or
personnel on the movement area.

d. State the runway intersection when authorizing
an aircraft to taxi into position to hold or when
clearing an aircraft for takeoff from an intersection.

PHRASEOLOGY-
RUNWAY (number) AT (taxiway designator) (further
instructions as needed).

RUNWAY (number) AT (taxiway designator), POSITION
AND HOLD.

If requested or required,

RUNWAY (number) AT (taxiway designator)
INTERSECTION DEPARTURE, (remaining length) FEET
AVAILABLE.

e. If two or more aircraft call the tower ready for
departure, one or more at the approach and one or
more at the intersection, state the location of the
aircraft at the full length of the runway when
authorizing that aircraft to taxi into position and hold
or when clearing that aircraft for takeoff.

PHRASEOLOGY-
RUNWAY (number), FULL-LENGTH, POSITION AND
HOLD.

or

RUNWAY (number) FULL LENGTH, CLEARED FOR
TAKEOFF.

EXAMPLE-
“American Four Eighty Two, Runway Three Zero full
length, position and hold.”
“Cherokee Five Sierra Whiskey, Runway Two Five Right
full length, cleared for takeoff.”

NOTE-
The controller need not state the location of the aircraft
departing the full length of the runway if there are no
aircraft holding for departure at an intersection for that
same runway.

REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 3-9-4, Taxi into Position and Hold (TIPH).

 

[roncachamp]

Pilatus:
-did not catch that LC's P&H clearance did not include mention of an intersection departure as one would expect.
-did not read back "P&H 18L intersection Alpha" as required.

Required by what?

The term "read back" means "repeat my message back to me." The local controller didn't state the intersection.

LC
-did not realize Pilatus was at an intersection. Not informed or missed message from GC.

What else?

Pilatus missed that his instruction to position and hold immediately followed the takeoff clearance issued to Blue Streak. If he had heard that it should have alerted him that traffic was departing full length on that runway. The fact that he was holding for traffic landing on an intersecting runway behind him should have been an even better clue.

 

[roncachamp]

Towered cleared the RJ full length.

But did not state "full length".

I don't think tower read the intersection clearance correctly when they gave him position and hold--would have to listen again.

The tower issued the position and hold instruction to the Pilatus as if it was a full length departure, I believe that's where she thought the Pilatus was located.

Pilatus pilot didn't call from where he was cleared onto the active as you said.

The Pilatus didn't call the local controller at all, she called him.

 

[roncachamp]

Position and hold always makes me nervous.

Position and hold at an intersection would make me reaaaally nervous.

Especially if it's received when a departing aircraft has not just gone past your intersection.

 

[roncachamp]

As of a couple of years ago I have begun to position and hold by positioning my self on the runway at about a 60* angle to the runway so I can see whats comming behind me.

Are you in takeoff position when you're at about a 60° angle to the runway?


POSITION AND HOLD- Used by ATC to inform a
pilot to taxi onto the departure runway in takeoff
position and hold. It is not authorization for takeoff.
It is used when takeoff clearance cannot immediately
be issued because of traffic or other reasons.

 

[d.grimm]

I've had more problems with ATC at CLT than any other airport.
I had them tell me one night "if you can't play with the big guys, stay away"
I was in a Hawker, we came close, their fault, I sent a report, last I ever heard. I HATE CLT!!!
Dave

 

[flyersfan31]

Especially if it's received when a departing aircraft has not just gone past your intersection.

AMEN!

 

[Dr. O]

I am in position and holding when I am on the runway but still at right angles to the centerline... With the Apache, I simply advance one engine and stand on the rudder as the ship rolls and turns and accelerates in one motion... I absolutely refuse to be standing there blind behind me when planes are stacked like stair steps in the sky coming to the runway and the controller is running around like a headless chicken... If that bothers the controller, screw him - it's my butt on the line out here...

denny-o

 

[roncachamp]

I've had more problems with ATC at CLT than any other airport.
I had them tell me one night "if you can't play with the big guys, stay away"
I was in a Hawker, we came close, their fault, I sent a report, last I ever heard.

What happened?

 

[AdamZ]

Are you in takeoff position when you're at about a 60° angle to the runway?


POSITION AND HOLD- Used by ATC to inform a
pilot to taxi onto the departure runway in takeoff
position and hold. It is not authorization for takeoff.
It is used when takeoff clearance cannot immediately
be issued because of traffic or other reasons.

Steve, I believe I am in take off position. I'm flying a Cherokee or other small SEP GA aircraft I'm not flying a DC-8 or other larger plane. at 60* ( and of course I'm just estimating) I get the cleared for takeoff, Throttle goes in and I'm on runway heading in a matter of seconds. The turn radius is pretty small.

I have seen potential incursions and once I was cleared on to the runway for a Position and hold when another aircraft was cleared to take off. All it takes is one time to get killed and I have Never had a tower controller complain once.

 

[N801BH]

Just for a baseline,
the contract tower here at Jackson Hole Wy has not issued a taxi in position and hold for a few years. I did ask them a while back why and they said, their company SERCO has made it a system wide policy to prevent this exact thing from happening. YMMV

 

[dmccormack]

Just for a baseline,
the contract tower here at Jackson Hole Wy has not issued a taxi in position and hold for a few years. I did ask them a while back why and they said, their company SERCO has made it a system wide policy to prevent this exact thing from happening. YMMV

The contract tower at MGW will issue a P&Hold, but usually to give the departing airplane time to clear the runway.

I've never waited or had to remind them I was a sitting duck.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

But did not state "full length".

The tower issued the position and hold instruction to the Pilatus as if it was a full length departure, I believe that's where she thought the Pilatus was located.

The Pilatus didn't call the local controller at all, she called him.

Yes, I agree, the tower didn't state full length. Thanks for pointing that out.

I see now how the controller could have thought the Pilatus was full length; didn't think of that.

What I meant is when ever I do an intersection departure, when I reply to tower (or call them after runup) I state the intersection where located. The Pilatus didn't do that. If it had, maybe it would have clicked with the controller it wasn't full length--don't know, but maybe.

A pilot on AvSig raised the issue that intersection A isn't at a 90 degree angle to 18L. It would have been hard for a pilot in the left seat to see down the runway behind him. John Collins, who flew a V-tail out of there for years said he wouldn't accept a departure from that intersection as it was very difficult to see down the runway and it would take a long time to get out. That might have been vortices separation.

As to Scott's comment about several runways and getting confused as to which one departing traffic is on: tower has separate frequencies for the parallel 18 runways. I'd have to look to see how many are on that frequency. From the animation, 23 was on that frequency. Although the animation didn't show it, normally at CLT they use one runway to depart and queue the planes up. Not saying that's what was going on here, but last I flew out, I was put in the airliner conga line and departed right behind one.

Thanks for all the excellent observations. Always learning and would much rather learn here than on the runway!!

Best,

Dave

 

[roncachamp]

Steve, I believe I am in take off position. I'm flying a Cherokee or other small SEP GA aircraft I'm not flying a DC-8 or other larger plane. at 60* ( and of course I'm just estimating) I get the cleared for takeoff, Throttle goes in and I'm on runway heading in a matter of seconds. The turn radius is pretty small.

I don't believe you're in takeoff position if you need to reposition your aircraft before beginning takeoff roll. Why does the definition include the words "in takeoff position" if simply taxiing onto the runway is all that's necessary to comply with the instruction? You obviously recognize that what may take just seconds for you can take considerably longer for other aircraft. But the P/CG was created to promote a common understanding of the terms used in the Air Traffic Control system. The same instruction should elicit the same response, whether "small SEP GA aircraft" or DC8.

I have seen potential incursions and once I was cleared on to the runway for a Position and hold when another aircraft was cleared to take off.

Care to expand on that?

 

[gismo]

Position and hold always makes me nervous.

Position and hold at an intersection would make me reaaaally nervous.

TP&H at a mid field intersection wouldn't make me nervous at all... because I simply won't accept that clearance if my intersection is more than a hundred feet from the end. It's bad enough sitting on the end of a runway worrying about someone trying to land on top of you but holding with my back to anyone taking off on the full length just goes beyond my tolerance level. I'll happily depart from an intersection on a runway if that leaves me a true balanced field (e.g. 5000 ft in the flatlands) but I'll hold short until my takeoff clearance, thank you.

 

[gismo]

Steve, I believe I am in take off position. I'm flying a Cherokee or other small SEP GA aircraft I'm not flying a DC-8 or other larger plane. at 60* ( and of course I'm just estimating) I get the cleared for takeoff, Throttle goes in and I'm on runway heading in a matter of seconds. The turn radius is pretty small.

I have seen potential incursions and once I was cleared on to the runway for a Position and hold when another aircraft was cleared to take off. All it takes is one time to get killed and I have Never had a tower controller complain once.

I'm with you Adam, sitting at that angle (and preferably offset so that you'll be centered when you complete the turn) is close enough to the undefined "in position" and it's safer because you'll be able to see what's coming from behind and in many cases you'll be more visible to such traffic as well. Nothing I've ever read or heard from an official source indicated that "in position" required that the plane be aligned with the runway and everywhere I've been, sitting at an angle has been acceptable to ATC (at least no one's ever complained) although my angle is usually closer to 45°.

 

[roncachamp]

A pilot on AvSig raised the issue that intersection A isn't at a 90 degree angle to 18L. It would have been hard for a pilot in the left seat to see down the runway behind him.

Here are the transmissions:

LC: "Blue Streak 390, wind 280 at 6, Runway 18L, cleared for takeoff."

JIA390: "Cleared for takeoff 18L, Blue Streak 390."

LC: N409DR, Charlotte Tower, 18L position and hold, traffic landing Runway 23."


The Pilatus pilot may not have been able to see what was coming down the runway, but he should have heard the takeoff clearance to Blue Streak issued for the same runway he was instructed to taxi onto and also that pilot's read back of that takeoff clearance. Perhaps he had just selected the local control frequency and missed both of them.

Now look closely at the instruction to position and hold issued to N409DR. The controller issued the reason for the position and hold, it was for traffic landing on runway 23. But there is no conflict between traffic departing on runway 18L from taxiway A and traffic landing on runway 23. That should have alerted the Pilatus pilot. Clearly, the controller believes the Pilatus is departing full length. She mentions the traffic landing runway 23 because the pilot can't see it, she does not mention the Blue Streak departing runway 18L because she believes the Pilatus is behind it and can clearly see it.

 

[N801BH]

Here are the transmissions:

LC: "Blue Streak 390, wind 280 at 6, Runway 18L, cleared for takeoff."

JIA390: "Cleared for takeoff 18L, Blue Streak 390."

LC: N409DR, Charlotte Tower, 18L position and hold, traffic landing Runway 23."


The Pilatus pilot may not have been able to see what was coming down the runway, but he should have heard the takeoff clearance to Blue Streak issued for the same runway he was instructed to taxi onto and also that pilot's read back of that takeoff clearance. Perhaps he had just selected the local control frequency and missed both of them.

Now look closely at the instruction to position and hold issued to N409DR. The controller issued the reason for the position and hold, it was for traffic landing on runway 23. But there is no conflict between traffic departing on runway 18L from taxiway A and traffic landing on runway 23. That should have alerted the Pilatus pilot. Clearly, the controller believes the Pilatus is departing full length. She mentions the traffic landing runway 23 because the pilot can't see it, she does not mention the Blue Streak departing runway 18L because she believes the Pilatus is behind it and can clearly see it.

That appears to the the correct scenerio Steven, and ya know I hate to agree with you ... But

"She mentions the traffic landing 23 because the pilot can't see it" is a assumption that might not hold water. If the LC thought DR was following Blue Streak the Pilatus would have been pointing right at the landing traffic while waiting to taxi and hold onto 18L. Correct ?

 

[gismo]

Thanks to technology, the accident was avoided. Everyone should be reminded to have their transponders on ALT (Mode C) during taxi and while on an active runway at airports where the ASDE-X surveillance system is in use

It wasn't just the technology assuming the animated recreation is accurate. That shows the Pilatus moving to avoid the oncoming jet without any instruction from the frazzled controller to the single. Perhaps the pilot caught a glimpse of the jet or maybe his subconscious mind had already started putting together the puzzle pieces and he moved to the side because of a "bad feeling". I would be interesting to query that pilot about this particular point (as well as his take on the whole thing). On thing I think is pretty likely: if the Pilatus was on the centerline, the jet would have clipped it unless the jet's wings were high enough to go over the fuselage and spinning prop. So I think the Pilatus pilot deserves some of the credit for avoiding the potential disaster.

As to the Pilatus missing the lack of any mention of the intersection in his TP&H clearance, I'm having a hard time faulting him for that as I think many of us (myself included) would likely fail to recognize that.

I do believe that the taxiway orientation (at a fairly shallow angle to the runway) could have made it more difficult for the Pilatus pilot to see to his right but I suspect that there was likely plenty of room to turn to the right far enough to see the entire runway (and approach path) before coming onto the runway. Nothing says you have to follow the yellow stripes unless there are piles of snow lining the pavement and even then I'd think the taxiway clearance zone would have left plenty of room for the relatively small Pilatus. I strive to always look down a runway before entering/crossing it (I admit I have sometimes failed to do this) and will turn the plane as necessary to provide an adequate view.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

One of the controllers on AvSig said he prefers not to do intersection departures from the departing runway like this (when there is a departure conga line). He prefers to use the arrival runway when possible. If someone calls in and requests that departure, he offers alternatives when possible.

Looks like this will now become 'line up and wait'.

Best,

Dave

 

[AdamZ]

I don't believe you're in takeoff position if you need to reposition your aircraft before beginning takeoff roll. Why does the definition include the words "in takeoff position" if simply taxiing onto the runway is all that's necessary to comply with the instruction? You obviously recognize that what may take just seconds for you can take considerably longer for other aircraft. But the P/CG was created to promote a common understanding of the terms used in the Air Traffic Control system. The same instruction should elicit the same response, whether "small SEP GA aircraft" or DC8.

I understand your point but I guess its a bit of sematics. If Position and Hold were defined as your plane on centerline facing runway heading that leaves less room for interpretation. But as per the definition that you posted:

"POSITION AND HOLD- Used by ATC to inform a
pilot to taxi onto the departure runway in takeoff
position and hold. It is not authorization for takeoff.
It is used when takeoff clearance cannot immediately
be issued because of traffic or other reasons."

I believe I have complied. In the little PA28 that I fly being angled 45* to 60* from runway heading can be considered in takeoff position because it really adds nothing time or distance wise to the take off roll. I don't reposition to runway heading and then stop and then start the roll. Of course thats going to be different for a large jet

Care to expand on that?

Sure, It was actually on my second solo as a student. I was like number three or four in line for departure and there were one or two aircraft beind me. The tower controller was holding departing traffic for what seemed like forever at our Class D and allowing arrival after arrival after arrival and so on. So everyone in line gave gentel reminders ie Tower bugsmasher 34X is still number three for departure etc.

We finally moved up and I was perhaps Number 2. The tower told me to position and hold ( now remember I was number 2 not Number one) and cleared number three behind me for departure when he called up and started getting grumpy. we were there for a REALLY long time. Of course nothing came of it as the instructions were absurd, we would both have to taxi through the plane in front of me just to get to the runway. the Pilot in Number 3 reamed out the Tower controller to no end on the radio. Even though there was no incursion it showed me that the Tower Controller can easily get it wrong and that mistake could cost me my life.

 

[roncachamp]

That appears to the the correct scenerio Steven, and ya know I hate to agree with you ...

You'll get over it.

But

"She mentions the traffic landing 23 becasue the pilot can't see it" is a assumption that might not hold water. If the LC thought DR was following Blue Streak the Pilatus would have been pointing right at the landing traffic while waiting to taxi and hold onto 18L. Correct ?

Actually, the requirement is to issue traffic information to any aircraft instructed to position and hold. It can be omitted when the traffic is another aircraft which has landed on or is taking off the same runway and is clearly visible to the holding aircraft.

 

[rpadula]

It is certainly the controller's fault these two aircraft got this close. I'm assuming the Pilatus was on tower frequency when the takeoff clearance was issued to the jet. If so, the Pilatus driver should have heard the conflict and been aware of that possibility since he was taking off at an intersection.

Maybe he heard it and maybe he didn't.

One other contributing factor in my mind is that pilots are in a "do what you're told" mode and wish to comply with instructions as soon as possible. Especially in a busy environment like this. Sometimes that need to comply overrides any other info coming in to the ol' noggin'.

 

[roncachamp]

I understand your point but I guess its a bit of sematics. If Position and Hold were defined as your plane on centerline facing runway heading that leaves less room for interpretation. But as per the definition that you posted:

"POSITION AND HOLD- Used by ATC to inform a
pilot to taxi onto the departure runway in takeoff
position and hold. It is not authorization for takeoff.
It is used when takeoff clearance cannot immediately
be issued because of traffic or other reasons."

I believe I have complied. In the little PA28 that I fly being angled 45* to 60* from runway heading can be considered in takeoff position because it really adds nothing time or distance wise to the take off roll. I don't reposition to runway heading and then stop and then start the roll. Of course thats going to be different for a large jet

As you interpret it the words "in takeoff position" have no meaning. So why are they included?

 

[Lawreston]

[SNIP]
Thanks for all the excellent observations. Always learning and would much rather learn here than on the runway!!

Best,

Dave

.... and one might take note that this has been a much more civil discussion than might have been on the red board.
(a personal observation)

HR

 

[ScottM]

.... and one might take note that this has been a much more civil discussion than might have been on the red board.
(a personal observation)

HR

What's a red board?

If this had taken place on the purple board we would have most likely known that the mistake was due to the controller's breakfast choices!

 

[rottydaddy]

I agree that the controller probably didn't know or forgot that the Pilatus was not waiting for a full-length; that was domino #1, followed by the Pilatus pilot blindly following the instruction, followed by the jet crew not (apparently) realizing that she'd just cleared the Pilatus to P&H right in front of them as they began their roll.

Thank goodness for the alarm, or none of the three parties would likely have realized it in time!!

My first thought, though, watching the animation, was "why doesn't she tell the Pilatus to 'cob it' and cross the runway without trying to turn?" the Pilatus was still rolling along the taxiway line when the alarm went off; all he'd have had to do is keep going (briskly).
That would have been easier, quicker, and safer than telling the jet to abort. A second later, and they would probably have been unable to stop. Meanwhile, the Pilatus can only turn so quickly, and they appear to have done so only when they actually saw the jet coming.

I guess she just wasn't visualizing the situation (she could see those areas of the runway, though, right?), or maybe she is trained to tell departing traffic to abort when that alarm goes off, and just blurted out the abort.

At any rate, if the Pilatus had just rolled across quickly, that would have worked out best, I think. No abort, no planes stuck midfield on the runway at odd angles, and a few less gray hairs all around.

I have two questions; maybe someone can answer them:

Can the cab controllers see that half of the runway? If she could see these two planes, I don't get how it happened in the first place.

and

Can everyone on Tower and/or Ground freq hear the alarm? If they could, that could greatly enhance solving these problems when they develop. You may not know if the alarm involves you, but if are taking or crossing the active, it would definitely get your attention. A pilot may be able to make the best correction even before the controller (who might be so horrified they can barely speak) can issue corrective instructions.

At any rate... regarding runway safety in general at towered airports:
I'll bet none of these people ever had a close shave like that before; that, sadly, seems to be the best way to ensure more effective situational awareness.

First time you are given a P&H or any instruction or clearance by tower, and look to see you are entering a conflict with another flight by doing so, you will change the way you think, act, speak, and listen at towered airports, believe me. It worked for me, that's for sure.

Trust, but verify...

 

[roncachamp]

I have two questions; maybe someone can answer them:

Can the cab controllers see that half of the runway? If she could see these two planes, I don't get how it happened in the first place.

Very probably. Field elevation is 748 feet and the control tower rises to 910 feet, the intersection of runway 18L and taxiway A looks to be about 4000 feet from the tower.

and

Can everyone on Tower and/or Ground freq hear the alarm?

If they could would they recognize what it is? These types of alarms are usually only on a speaker, and that's how it sounds in the recording.

 

[N801BH]

You'll get over it.



Actually, the requirement is to issue traffic information to any aircraft instructed to position and hold. It can be omitted when the traffic is another aircraft which has landed on or is taking off the same runway and is clearly visible to the holding aircraft.

So I guess the LC ( should ) have instructed the Pilatus that was told to P&H to watch out,, they are about to be dinner for a rolling jetliner?

I guess the "clearly visible" will now come into play.


And you are right... I am over it.. .

Darn,I hate it when you are right.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

.... and one might take note that this has been a much more civil discussion than might have been on the red board.
(a personal observation)

HR

Harley: I don't frequent the Red Board anymore; I would rather learn from things like this than listen to folks emotionally scream when they don't add anything to the dialogue. The manner in which they treated Dr. Bruce caused me great pain.

I try to address someone on here as I would if in person (and as if they are a person). Too many folks on that board didn't do that. If some of them would spend less time 'marking their territory' and more time trying to improve, they could become accomplished, safer pilots.

Being the OP on this tread, it's wonderful seeing the responses and productive discussion generated. I'll do it again because of that.

Best,

Dave

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Steve and others have the scenario correct; for whatever reason, LC thought the Pilatus was departing full length 18L, behind the jet. Runway incursion prevention is a joint effort between pilots and controllers. Her phraseology was correct for where she thought the Pilatus was positioned. If the Pilatus pilot had been paying attention to this guidance from the AIM, he'd have prevented all this:

31.7 When ATC issues intersection “position and hold” and takeoff clearances, the intersection designator will be used. If ATC omits the intersection designator, call ATC for clarification.

EXAMPLE−
Aircraft: “Cherokee 234AR, Runway 24L at November 4, position and hold.”

And, from the FAA's "Runway Safety for Pilots", among many other gems:

When assigned a departure at an intersection versus a full length take-off, state “intersection departure” at the end of the take-off clearance readback.

 

[roncachamp]

So I guess the LC ( should ) have instructed the Pilatus that was told to P&H to watch out,, they are about to be dinner for a rolling jetliner?

No, she should have used the callsign of the aircraft that was behind JIA390 instead of the Pilatus' callsign when she said; "N409DR, Charlotte Tower, 18L position and hold, traffic landing Runway 23."

I guess the "clearly visible" will now come into play.

Why? Don't you think Blue Streak 390 was clearly visible to the aircraft that was directly behind it in sequence?

Darn,I hate it when you are right.

I am sorry to be such a frequent irritant.

 

[AdamZ]

As you interpret it the words "in takeoff position" have no meaning. So why are they included?

Steven I interpret it to mean that I am in a position to take off and I am. Apply throttle along with slight right or left rudder and I'm on my way down the runway on runway heading. I'm not gumming up the controllers sequencing or delaying other traffic one bit.

I suspect that something like that would bother you at your field if you are in the tower ( not sure). If you really feel it would screw things up tell me why. I'm more than happy to hear opposing positions and consider them.