Narrative:

We were engaged in primary flight instruction and doing touch and goes on runway 25 at twf. Runway 25 is the primary runway at twf and was the runway in use. A turbo ag cat was returning from aerial application northwest of twf. Wind was reported at 300 degrees at 5 KTS. The ag cat told the tower he would make a right downwind for runway 30. (Runway 30 is a secondary 'crosswind' runway and is used primarily by ag aircraft.) (my remembrance is that the tower approved that approach for the ag cat; but did not suggest it.) we were climbing from runway 25 when I noticed the ag cat crossing our departure path at about 400 ft AGL. We passed below and behind the ag cat. I did not believe that we were in danger of colliding at any time; but I'm sure that our separation was far less than required in the traffic pattern. After we were well past the ag cat the local controller told us that the other pilot had us in sight. (I do not remember the pilot saying that on tower frequency.) I felt that this was simply an attempt to justify the situation. I told the tower that we had the other aircraft in sight also. I do not believe that the local controller should have allowed the ag cat to overfly the runway in use. The ag cat was not at the usual pattern altitude (5;000 ft MSL) but at an estimated 4;450 ft MSL. I believe that the local controller should have either cleared the ag cat for a downwind approach to runway 25; or instructed him to do a 360 degree turn for spacing. Had we been in a higher performance aircraft with a higher rate of climb the situation could have been critical.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 Instructor pilot departing Runway 25 at TWF reports a NMAC with an Ag Cat on a visual downwind for Runway 30. Both aircraft were under Tower control and no evasive action was necessary.

Narrative: We were engaged in primary flight instruction and doing touch and goes on Runway 25 at TWF. Runway 25 is the primary runway at TWF and was the runway in use. A turbo Ag Cat was returning from aerial application northwest of TWF. Wind was reported at 300 degrees at 5 KTS. The Ag Cat told the Tower he would make a right downwind for Runway 30. (Runway 30 is a secondary 'crosswind' runway and is used primarily by Ag aircraft.) (My remembrance is that the Tower approved that approach for the Ag Cat; but did not suggest it.) We were climbing from Runway 25 when I noticed the Ag Cat crossing our departure path at about 400 FT AGL. We passed below and behind the Ag Cat. I did not believe that we were in danger of colliding at any time; but I'm sure that our separation was far less than required in the traffic pattern. After we were well past the Ag Cat the Local Controller told us that the other pilot had us in sight. (I do not remember the pilot saying that on Tower frequency.) I felt that this was simply an attempt to justify the situation. I told the Tower that we had the other aircraft in sight also. I do not believe that the Local Controller should have allowed the Ag Cat to overfly the runway in use. The Ag Cat was not at the usual pattern altitude (5;000 FT MSL) but at an estimated 4;450 FT MSL. I believe that the Local Controller should have either cleared the Ag Cat for a downwind approach to Runway 25; or instructed him to do a 360 degree turn for spacing. Had we been in a higher performance aircraft with a higher rate of climb the situation could have been critical.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.