Narrative:

While on the ground at provo airport I contacted slc approach on the local frequency (118.85) and asked for permission to shoot 2 ILS approachs into provo using our own navigation. Permission was granted and we, small aircraft X, were given a transponder code. Radar contact was established by ATC approximately 5 mins after takeoff. We monitored provo unicom on the other radio. After passing dicot intersection inbound (descending out of 8000 to 7000 ft), ATC advised us of traffic at 7100 ft MSL, at our 6 O'clock, 1 mi, and other traffic at 1 O'clock and 2 mi, 7600 ft MSL. Both targets were approaching us. We broadcast on unicom at dicot our position and intentions. Another aircraft reported he too was on the ILS approach and at 7000 ft descending. I looked ahead to try and find him as the crossing height of lalee (the FAF) is 7000 ft and we were still north of the FAF. We radioed this information. Another aircraft reported that he saw a plane, Y, behind us 1/2 mi and below. The Y behind us radioed he had us in sight and was descending out of 6800 for 6400 ft. I had the pilot s-turn so I could attempt contact visually. I saw Y approximately 10 seconds after he reported his altitude change. He was rapidly gaining on us from below. I called approach, told them we were executing a missed approach, then told other aircraft we were turning west and climbing to 8000 ft. The aim manual paragraph 244 (B & C) outlines the proper procedures for practicing INS approachs. I did this. The other aircraft did not follow this advice, nor communicate on unicom until we asked. Provo is largely a training field and both proper radio and procedural courtesies should be followed. Slc radar generally doesn't pick up targets below 7000 ft MSL (mountainous terrain). The controller had not given any traffic advisories prior to the other traffic showing up at 7100 ft. He sounded surprised and nervous about this traffic (so was I!); however, it was VFR and I should have been more diligent in my scan (I was already scanning, but I should have seen him sooner). Also, I feel part of this close call was due to the fact that the other aircraft did not follow the aim's advice. Perhaps the sentence in 244 (C) should say: 'pilots wishing to make practice INS approachs must notify the facility...'. This would certainly help the controllers with traffic advisories and help pilots to see and avoid better.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA X ON PRACITCE ILS APCH HAS A CONFLICT WITH ACFT Y, ALSO ON PRACTICE APCH OVERTAKING FROM BEHIND.

Narrative: WHILE ON THE GND AT PROVO ARPT I CONTACTED SLC APCH ON THE LCL FREQ (118.85) AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION TO SHOOT 2 ILS APCHS INTO PROVO USING OUR OWN NAV. PERMISSION WAS GRANTED AND WE, SMA X, WERE GIVEN A XPONDER CODE. RADAR CONTACT WAS ESTABLISHED BY ATC APPROX 5 MINS AFTER TKOF. WE MONITORED PROVO UNICOM ON THE OTHER RADIO. AFTER PASSING DICOT INTXN INBND (DSNDING OUT OF 8000 TO 7000 FT), ATC ADVISED US OF TFC AT 7100 FT MSL, AT OUR 6 O'CLOCK, 1 MI, AND OTHER TFC AT 1 O'CLOCK AND 2 MI, 7600 FT MSL. BOTH TARGETS WERE APCHING US. WE BROADCAST ON UNICOM AT DICOT OUR POS AND INTENTIONS. ANOTHER ACFT RPTED HE TOO WAS ON THE ILS APCH AND AT 7000 FT DSNDING. I LOOKED AHEAD TO TRY AND FIND HIM AS THE XING HEIGHT OF LALEE (THE FAF) IS 7000 FT AND WE WERE STILL N OF THE FAF. WE RADIOED THIS INFO. ANOTHER ACFT RPTED THAT HE SAW A PLANE, Y, BEHIND US 1/2 MI AND BELOW. THE Y BEHIND US RADIOED HE HAD US IN SIGHT AND WAS DSNDING OUT OF 6800 FOR 6400 FT. I HAD THE PLT S-TURN SO I COULD ATTEMPT CONTACT VISUALLY. I SAW Y APPROX 10 SECS AFTER HE RPTED HIS ALT CHANGE. HE WAS RAPIDLY GAINING ON US FROM BELOW. I CALLED APCH, TOLD THEM WE WERE EXECUTING A MISSED APCH, THEN TOLD OTHER ACFT WE WERE TURNING W AND CLBING TO 8000 FT. THE AIM MANUAL PARAGRAPH 244 (B & C) OUTLINES THE PROPER PROCS FOR PRACTICING INS APCHS. I DID THIS. THE OTHER ACFT DID NOT FOLLOW THIS ADVICE, NOR COMMUNICATE ON UNICOM UNTIL WE ASKED. PROVO IS LARGELY A TRNING FIELD AND BOTH PROPER RADIO AND PROCEDURAL COURTESIES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. SLC RADAR GENERALLY DOESN'T PICK UP TARGETS BELOW 7000 FT MSL (MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN). THE CTLR HAD NOT GIVEN ANY TFC ADVISORIES PRIOR TO THE OTHER TFC SHOWING UP AT 7100 FT. HE SOUNDED SURPRISED AND NERVOUS ABOUT THIS TFC (SO WAS I!); HOWEVER, IT WAS VFR AND I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE DILIGENT IN MY SCAN (I WAS ALREADY SCANNING, BUT I SHOULD HAVE SEEN HIM SOONER). ALSO, I FEEL PART OF THIS CLOSE CALL WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE OTHER ACFT DID NOT FOLLOW THE AIM'S ADVICE. PERHAPS THE SENTENCE IN 244 (C) SHOULD SAY: 'PLTS WISHING TO MAKE PRACTICE INS APCHS MUST NOTIFY THE FAC...'. THIS WOULD CERTAINLY HELP THE CTLRS WITH TFC ADVISORIES AND HELP PLTS TO SEE AND AVOID BETTER.

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