Narrative:

I was on an INS training flight as an INS instrument doing the VOR/DME-a approach at fnl. As we got within 5 mi of the airport, we heard 2 different aircraft on the unicom frequency. 1 aircraft reported, 'NDB inbound for the NDB approach to 33.' a second aircraft had reported departing runway 15 (opp direction due to favored wind). We were approaching the runway environment at approximately an 80 degree angle to the main runway. We were planning a low approach. The first problem with the student was south of course approximately 1 mi, which placed us crossing over the final approach course to runway 33, 1/2 mi south of threshold. I continued the approach at the MDA waiting for our missed approach point based on time. The second problem was I was not paying enough attention to the fact that there were converging flight paths already occurring and I was heading right for the same flight path. About right over the final approach course and 1/2 mi from the threshold, an aircraft passed directly underneath us, heading south, departing runway 15 (climbing) within 100'. No more than 2-3 seconds later, another aircraft passed over us heading to the north on the NDB runway 33 approach. That aircraft was within 50' and I heard the engine as it passed over us. If 1 aircraft had been at a slightly different altitude and a couple seconds later or earlier, there could have been a 3-WAY collision and we would have been sandwiched. My student never knew what happened until I told him later. I believe the main problem was poor judgement on my part in analyzing the situation quicker and abandoning the approach should have been my decision. Also the aircraft on the NDB approach should have done a missed approach earlier since the departing aircraft was heading opp direction into his path. The airport area along with greeley/weld county airport are overcrowded with training aircraft practicing these approachs regularaly. Approach control/center radar can be used more in this area for training flts, even though we are not in a TCA or arsa. More study into this would prove a lot of accidents could occur more than in a controled environment unless radar is provided. VFR flight following in this area is not adequate enough at the initial altitudes for approachs and sep. The second main problem is instrs working for starting wages and willing to fly when they are physically exhausted to train the people who may eventually be airline pilots.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC BETWEEN 3 ACFT ON A NON TWR ARPT OPERATION UNICOM--2 ON TRAINING FLTS MAKING APCHS AND 1 ON A DEP. REPORTER COMPLAINS OF LACK OF RADAR SERVICE AND SEPARATION OF TRAFFIC IN THE CROWDED AREA AROUND FORT COLLINS AND GREELEY ARPTS, CO.

Narrative: I WAS ON AN INS TRNING FLT AS AN INS INSTR DOING THE VOR/DME-A APCH AT FNL. AS WE GOT WITHIN 5 MI OF THE ARPT, WE HEARD 2 DIFFERENT ACFT ON THE UNICOM FREQ. 1 ACFT RPTED, 'NDB INBND FOR THE NDB APCH TO 33.' A SECOND ACFT HAD RPTED DEPARTING RWY 15 (OPP DIRECTION DUE TO FAVORED WIND). WE WERE APCHING THE RWY ENVIRONMENT AT APPROX AN 80 DEG ANGLE TO THE MAIN RWY. WE WERE PLANNING A LOW APCH. THE FIRST PROB WITH THE STUDENT WAS S OF COURSE APPROX 1 MI, WHICH PLACED US XING OVER THE FINAL APCH COURSE TO RWY 33, 1/2 MI S OF THRESHOLD. I CONTINUED THE APCH AT THE MDA WAITING FOR OUR MISSED APCH POINT BASED ON TIME. THE SECOND PROB WAS I WAS NOT PAYING ENOUGH ATTN TO THE FACT THAT THERE WERE CONVERGING FLT PATHS ALREADY OCCURRING AND I WAS HDG RIGHT FOR THE SAME FLT PATH. ABOUT RIGHT OVER THE FINAL APCH COURSE AND 1/2 MI FROM THE THRESHOLD, AN ACFT PASSED DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH US, HDG S, DEPARTING RWY 15 (CLBING) WITHIN 100'. NO MORE THAN 2-3 SECS LATER, ANOTHER ACFT PASSED OVER US HDG TO THE N ON THE NDB RWY 33 APCH. THAT ACFT WAS WITHIN 50' AND I HEARD THE ENG AS IT PASSED OVER US. IF 1 ACFT HAD BEEN AT A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ALT AND A COUPLE SECS LATER OR EARLIER, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A 3-WAY COLLISION AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN SANDWICHED. MY STUDENT NEVER KNEW WHAT HAPPENED UNTIL I TOLD HIM LATER. I BELIEVE THE MAIN PROB WAS POOR JUDGEMENT ON MY PART IN ANALYZING THE SITUATION QUICKER AND ABANDONING THE APCH SHOULD HAVE BEEN MY DECISION. ALSO THE ACFT ON THE NDB APCH SHOULD HAVE DONE A MISSED APCH EARLIER SINCE THE DEPARTING ACFT WAS HDG OPP DIRECTION INTO HIS PATH. THE ARPT AREA ALONG WITH GREELEY/WELD COUNTY ARPT ARE OVERCROWDED WITH TRNING ACFT PRACTICING THESE APCHS REGULARALY. APCH CTL/CENTER RADAR CAN BE USED MORE IN THIS AREA FOR TRNING FLTS, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT IN A TCA OR ARSA. MORE STUDY INTO THIS WOULD PROVE A LOT OF ACCIDENTS COULD OCCUR MORE THAN IN A CTLED ENVIRONMENT UNLESS RADAR IS PROVIDED. VFR FLT FOLLOWING IN THIS AREA IS NOT ADEQUATE ENOUGH AT THE INITIAL ALTS FOR APCHS AND SEP. THE SECOND MAIN PROB IS INSTRS WORKING FOR STARTING WAGES AND WILLING TO FLY WHEN THEY ARE PHYSICALLY EXHAUSTED TO TRAIN THE PEOPLE WHO MAY EVENTUALLY BE AIRLINE PLTS.

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.