MLG COPIED TKOF CLRNC FOR SMA AND TAXIED ONTO ACTIVE RWY CAUSING TWR TO CANCEL ALL TKOF CLRNCS AND SEND AN SMT ON FINAL AROUND.

Narrative

APCHING END OF RWY 36R AT CLT WE SWITCHED TO TWR FREQ. WE THEN RECEIVED A CLRNC FOR IMMEDIATE TKOF. AFTER OBSERVING THAT THE SMT Z FLT ON FINAL WAS NO FACTOR WE ACKNOWLEDGED THE TKOF CLRNC. WHEN WE MOVED ONTO THE RWY WE OBSERVED AN SMA Y ON THE RWY IN POS ABOUT 2000' DOWN THE RWY. WE THEN BROUGHT BOTH ENGS TO IDLE. KNOWING THAT BOTH OF US COULD NOT BE AIRBORNE IN TIME FOR THE SMT Z TO LAND; I LET THE ACFT ROLL TOWARD THE BYPASS TURN OFF ANTICIPATING A TURN OFF AT TWR'S REQUEST. THE TWR THEN TOLD THE SMA Y TO TURN RIGHT AND CLR THE RWY; THEN TOLD US TO HOLD OUR POS. THE TWR THEN INSTRUCTED THE SMT Z TO GO AROUND AND THEN INSTRUCTED US TO TAXI UP TO THE BYPASS AND CLR THE RWY; TAXIING BACK TO #1 POS. WE TOOK THE TKOF CLRNC NOT KNOWING THE SMA Y WAS ALREADY ON THE RWY. WE WERE THE ONLY ACFT AT THE END OF RWY 36R WHILE 36L HAD MANY ACFT ON ANOTHER FREQ. WITH DEPS FROM MULTIPLE INTXNS; I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN. ONE WAY TO AVOID THIS WOULD BE SEQUENCING BY GND CTL ADVISING OF MULTIPLE DEP POINTS OR A SECOND CONFIRMATION VISUALLY AT THE RWY ENTRANCE POINT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 88270: JUST AS CREW OF FLT XYZ WAS ABOUT TO INQUIRE WITH TWR ABOUT THE SINGLE ENG SMA Y; TWR INSTRUCTED FLT XYZ TO HOLD OUR POS (CREW OF FLT XYZ HAD NEVER EVEN APPLIED TKOF THRUST) AND FOR THE SMA Y TO CLR THE RWY. TWR THEN INSTRUCTED COMMUTER TFC ON FINAL FOR 36 TO GO AROUND AND FOR FLT XYZ TO CLR THE RWY ONTO THE PARALLEL AND RETURN TO THE APCH END OF RWY 36R TO AWAIT FURTHER TKOF CLRNC. THIS PROB WAS DISCOVERED BY FLT XYZ CREW THE FOLLOWING DAY AS A RESULT OF CTL TWR CONTACTING OUR AIRLINE'S FLT DEPT. UPON DISCUSSION WITH CLT TWR PERSONNEL; IT APPEARS FLT XYZ CREW HEARD THE TAIL END OF TWR'S TKOF CLRNC TO THE SMA Y (WHICH WAS MAKING AN INTXN DEP FROM THE OPP SIDE OF RWY 36R THAT FLT XYZ WAS ON) AND UPON READING BACK THAT CLRNC TO THE TWR; TAXIED ONTO THE RWY WITH A TKOF CLRNC THAT WAS INTENDED FOR THE SMA Y. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: THE CREW'S MIND SET THAT THEY WERE THE ONLY ACFT IN SEQUENCE FOR DEP (DUE TO SMA Y AT INTXN BEING BEHIND CREW ON PARALLEL TXWY) ON RWY 36R; THE TWR NOT DENYING TKOF CLRNC TO FLT XYZ ONCE CREW READ BACK THE CLRNC TO TWR; AND THE POSSIBILITY OF THE SMA Y AND FLT XYZ BLOCKING EACH OTHER'S XMISSIONS. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: TWR DENIED ALL CLRNCS TO TKOF AND LAND UNTIL SITUATION WAS CLRED UP; AND FLT XYZ NEVER APPLYING TKOF THRUST. HUMAN PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS: AS MENTIONED EARLIER; FLT XYZ CREW'S MIND SET ABOUT BEING #1 FOR RWY 36R DEP. SUGGESTIONS: A DEFINITIVE HDOF PROC FROM GND CTL TO TWR GIVING FLT CREWS A PROPOSED TKOF SEQUENCE. EXAMPLE: 'SWITCH TO TWR #1 FOR TKOF;' OR 'EXPECT TO FOLLOW ACFT AHEAD.' CREW SHOULD HAVE LOOKED TO SEE IF RWY WAS CLR BEFORE TAXIING ONTO RWY.