AFTER LNDG; A DA20 CREW CROSS AN ACTIVE RWY WITHOUT OBTAINING A CLRNC.

Narrative

THIS IS A RWY INCURSION INCIDENT WHICH INVOLVES THE INADVERTENT XING OF AN ACTIVE RWY AT A CTLED ARPT; APPARENTLY WITHOUT A CLRNC TO DO SO. THERE WAS NO KNOWN CONFLICTING TFC OR NEAR MISS. AFTER CLRING THE PRIMARY ACTIVE RWY; WE REVERSED COURSE ON THE PARALLEL TXWY AND PROCEEDED TOWARD PARKING 'WHILE' CONTACTING GND CTL. THIS PARALLEL TXWY CROSSES ANOTHER (SHORTER) RWY WHICH IS COMMONLY ACTIVE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE PRIMARY. THERE WAS NO OBSERVED TFC OF ANY CONCERN ON THE GND OR INFLT. THE CREW IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ARPT. AFTER 2 EFFORTS TO CONTACT GND CTL TO RESULT IN A REPLY; THE TWR CTLR WAS CONTACTED FOR FREQ VERIFICATION (STILL TAXIING). THE TWR CTLR ADVISED THAT GND CTL WAS TEMPORARILY CHANGED TO AN APCH CTL FREQ. THIS FREQ WAS READ BACK BY THE COPLT INCORRECTLY; BUT CORRECTED BY THE CTLR AND READ BACK CORRECTLY BEFORE THE NEXT FREQ CHANGE. THE PIC WAS AWARE OF THE XING RWY APCHING; AND WHILE AWARE OF THE COM CONFUSION; SLOWED TO CHK FOR TFC AND VERBALLY VERIFIED 'CLRED TO CROSS' WITH THE COPLT WHO WAS HANDLING RADIO COM. COPLT RESPONDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE; SO WE CROSSED. WE WERE NOT AWARE OF ANY WRONGDOING; OTHER THAN PERHAPS A DELAYED TAXI CLRNC DUE TO THE FREQ CHANGE CONFUSION. ON THE RAMP; WE WERE ASKED TO CONTACT THE TWR BY TELEPHONE AND WERE THEN ADVISED THAT WE CROSSED THE INTERVENING RWY WITHOUT A CLRNC TO DO SO. WE WERE NOT ADVISED OF ANY CONCERNS RELATED TO CONFLICTING TFC. FURTHER SPECIFICS WERE NOT IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE FROM THE CTLRS. AFTER DISCUSSING AND NOT REMEMBERING THE FINAL OUTCOME OF GND CTL COMS; WE CHKED THE COPLT'S ACTIVE RADIO AND FOUND 120.225 TILL TUNED; RATHER THAN THE TEMPORARILY ASSIGNED 120.25. I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE SECOND INCORRECT FREQ TUNED. WE CONCLUDED FROM THIS; AS WAS LATER VERIFIED BY THE CTLRS; THAT WE HAD NEVER SUCCESSFULLY CONTACTED GND CTL TO RECEIVE A TAXI CLRNC. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: THIS WAS A SHORT; 40 MI; 15 MIN TRIP IN A COMPLEX; HIGH-PERFORMANCE AIRPLANE WITH EACH PHASE OF FLT RUSHED. AS A CREW; THESE 2 PLTS HAD NOT FLOWN TOGETHER RECENTLY AND PERHAPS ONLY ONCE IN THE PREVIOUS YR. ARRIVING ATIS WAS PARTIALLY HEARD; BUT NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD AND RECORDED. THE TEMPORARY GND CTL FREQ CHANGE WOULD HAVE BEEN ANNOUNCED AT THE END OF THE ATIS BROADCAST. WE BELIEVE THAT THE ARR APCH CTLR FAILED TO VERIFY THAT WE HAD RECEIVED ATIS (NOT TO ASSIGN BLAME; HOWEVER). CREW FAMILIARITY WITH THE ARPT: WITH NO TFC IN SIGHT; AND WITH THE CREW SO ACCUSTOMED TO BEING 'CLRED TO PARKING' BY TWR OR GND CTLRS; WE FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAD NOT BEEN SO CLRED; PERHAPS WHILE DISTR BY AFTER LNDG CHKLIST ITEMS. I ALWAYS ANNOUNCE; CHK AND CORRESPOND WITH THE SECOND PLT CONCERNING XING RWYS. ALTHOUGH THIS WAS DONE; OUR BRIEF DISCUSSION FAILED TO REVEAL THAT A CLRNC TO CROSS HAD NEVER ACTUALLY BEEN RECEIVED. OPPORTUNITIES MISSED TO PREVENT THIS INCIDENT: 1) ARRIVING ATIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD. 2) THE ACFT SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED UNTIL COMS WERE COMPLETE REGARDING TAXI CLRNC; ESPECIALLY AFTER THERE WAS KNOWN CONFUSION ABOUT THE FREQ AND BEFORE XING A POTENTIALLY ACTIVE RWY.