Narrative:

On all 7 of my previous flts from phx to carlsbad/mc clellan-palomar, I have been cleared for a straight in to runway 24. Therefore, I became accustomed to using escondido NDB as a reference point. On this flight, I contacted palomar tower when slightly north of the extended centerline, on the outskirts of escondido, approaching the NDB. The tower asked me to fly an approach over lake san marcos (south of the extended centerline) and reported a small aircraft Y estimating 2 mins from the OM. To follow the tower instructions it became necessary for us to cross the extended centerline to fly south of the ILS. About the time we crossed the ILS looking for the small aircraft Y, we spotted him slightly ahead of us, approximately 200' below. We do not know whether he turned on to the ILS below us or overtook us from left of our tail. Several factors contributed to the situation: 1) the traffic came from behind and/or below us, both of which are blind in our low wing small aircraft X. 2) the other pilot was apparently on an IFR flight plan and therefore may have had his eyes in the cockpit. 3) the tower did not give me a position of the small aircraft Y relative to our aircraft (in altitude or O'clock). 4) I was accustomed to using the escondido NDB for navigation, but the NDB is unfortunately on the ILS. 5) the encounter may have occurred at the time the small aircraft Y pilot was switching from san approach to palomar tower. The experience prompts me to suggest the following: 1) IFR procedures should be discussed in greater detail during primary training with emphasis on VFR/IFR traffic sep in the vicinity of navaids. 2) controllers should be made aware of the fact that an altitude/O'clock traffic report is more valuable to a VFR pilot than an IFR approach position with which he or she is probably not familiar. 3) VFR traffic into mc clellan-palomar could be asked to fly north or south of the ILS even when no IFR traffic is inbound.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLOSE PROX GA-SMA GA-SMA EAST OF CRQ IN ATA.

Narrative: ON ALL 7 OF MY PREVIOUS FLTS FROM PHX TO CARLSBAD/MC CLELLAN-PALOMAR, I HAVE BEEN CLRED FOR A STRAIGHT IN TO RWY 24. THEREFORE, I BECAME ACCUSTOMED TO USING ESCONDIDO NDB AS A REF POINT. ON THIS FLT, I CONTACTED PALOMAR TWR WHEN SLIGHTLY N OF THE EXTENDED CENTERLINE, ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF ESCONDIDO, APCHING THE NDB. THE TWR ASKED ME TO FLY AN APCH OVER LAKE SAN MARCOS (S OF THE EXTENDED CENTERLINE) AND RPTED A SMA Y ESTIMATING 2 MINS FROM THE OM. TO FOLLOW THE TWR INSTRUCTIONS IT BECAME NECESSARY FOR US TO CROSS THE EXTENDED CENTERLINE TO FLY S OF THE ILS. ABOUT THE TIME WE CROSSED THE ILS LOOKING FOR THE SMA Y, WE SPOTTED HIM SLIGHTLY AHEAD OF US, APPROX 200' BELOW. WE DO NOT KNOW WHETHER HE TURNED ON TO THE ILS BELOW US OR OVERTOOK US FROM LEFT OF OUR TAIL. SEVERAL FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO THE SITUATION: 1) THE TFC CAME FROM BEHIND AND/OR BELOW US, BOTH OF WHICH ARE BLIND IN OUR LOW WING SMA X. 2) THE OTHER PLT WAS APPARENTLY ON AN IFR FLT PLAN AND THEREFORE MAY HAVE HAD HIS EYES IN THE COCKPIT. 3) THE TWR DID NOT GIVE ME A POS OF THE SMA Y RELATIVE TO OUR ACFT (IN ALT OR O'CLOCK). 4) I WAS ACCUSTOMED TO USING THE ESCONDIDO NDB FOR NAV, BUT THE NDB IS UNFORTUNATELY ON THE ILS. 5) THE ENCOUNTER MAY HAVE OCCURRED AT THE TIME THE SMA Y PLT WAS SWITCHING FROM SAN APCH TO PALOMAR TWR. THE EXPERIENCE PROMPTS ME TO SUGGEST THE FOLLOWING: 1) IFR PROCS SHOULD BE DISCUSSED IN GREATER DETAIL DURING PRIMARY TRNING WITH EMPHASIS ON VFR/IFR TFC SEP IN THE VICINITY OF NAVAIDS. 2) CTLRS SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT AN ALT/O'CLOCK TFC RPT IS MORE VALUABLE TO A VFR PLT THAN AN IFR APCH POS WITH WHICH HE OR SHE IS PROBABLY NOT FAMILIAR. 3) VFR TFC INTO MC CLELLAN-PALOMAR COULD BE ASKED TO FLY N OR S OF THE ILS EVEN WHEN NO IFR TFC IS INBND.

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.