Narrative:

I was flying a series of simulated engine failure approachs from the downwind leg (right pattern 32R). My aircraft was a 1940 small aircraft X. My patterns were flown from the standpoint of a no radio, limited cockpit visibility aircraft. Turns were made so that a square pattern was maintained that would also allow a T/D near the runway threshold. During the 4TH or 5TH pattern, on the base to final turn an small aircraft Y was spotted on a half mi final (behind and above me). I elected to make a quick touch and go so as to allow the other small aircraft Y to land. The other small aircraft Y elected to go around. As I began to rotate, the other small aircraft Y passed directly over me at 75-100'. I kept my aircraft low during the climb out to allow plenty of sep. I believe that on my part, limited visibility, no radio, and the decision to continue the approach were contributing factors. As for the other aircraft Y I never saw it enter the pattern, which leads me to believe it made a straight in approach. The other small aircraft Y also failed to move to the right of the runway during his go around. Fortunately my aircraft has a poor rate of climb or a collision may have occurred. Also of importance, after the other small aircraft Y turned crosswind, he continued out 1.5 mi leading me to believe he was leaving the airport. As I then turned downwind I noted the other small aircraft Y turning to a downwind heading. I shortened my pattern to maintain sep and sure enough the other aircraft returned to the airport. As an instrument I am well aware of the varying sizes of traffic patterns. I have yet to see a pattern flown at an uncontrolled field this large. No other aircraft were present in the pattern at the time. The wind was calm. I can see no reason for a pattern this large in a small airplane at 800'. A requirement of operations in traffic patterns and pattern entries during bfrs is a possible solution.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC BETWEEN TWO SMA'S AT T02.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING A SERIES OF SIMULATED ENG FAILURE APCHS FROM THE DOWNWIND LEG (R PATTERN 32R). MY ACFT WAS A 1940 SMA X. MY PATTERNS WERE FLOWN FROM THE STANDPOINT OF A NO RADIO, LIMITED COCKPIT VISIBILITY ACFT. TURNS WERE MADE SO THAT A SQUARE PATTERN WAS MAINTAINED THAT WOULD ALSO ALLOW A T/D NEAR THE RWY THRESHOLD. DURING THE 4TH OR 5TH PATTERN, ON THE BASE TO FINAL TURN AN SMA Y WAS SPOTTED ON A HALF MI FINAL (BEHIND AND ABOVE ME). I ELECTED TO MAKE A QUICK TOUCH AND GO SO AS TO ALLOW THE OTHER SMA Y TO LAND. THE OTHER SMA Y ELECTED TO GO AROUND. AS I BEGAN TO ROTATE, THE OTHER SMA Y PASSED DIRECTLY OVER ME AT 75-100'. I KEPT MY ACFT LOW DURING THE CLBOUT TO ALLOW PLENTY OF SEP. I BELIEVE THAT ON MY PART, LIMITED VISIBILITY, NO RADIO, AND THE DECISION TO CONTINUE THE APCH WERE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS. AS FOR THE OTHER ACFT Y I NEVER SAW IT ENTER THE PATTERN, WHICH LEADS ME TO BELIEVE IT MADE A STRAIGHT IN APCH. THE OTHER SMA Y ALSO FAILED TO MOVE TO THE R OF THE RWY DURING HIS GO AROUND. FORTUNATELY MY ACFT HAS A POOR RATE OF CLB OR A COLLISION MAY HAVE OCCURRED. ALSO OF IMPORTANCE, AFTER THE OTHER SMA Y TURNED XWIND, HE CONTINUED OUT 1.5 MI LEADING ME TO BELIEVE HE WAS LEAVING THE ARPT. AS I THEN TURNED DOWNWIND I NOTED THE OTHER SMA Y TURNING TO A DOWNWIND HDG. I SHORTENED MY PATTERN TO MAINTAIN SEP AND SURE ENOUGH THE OTHER ACFT RETURNED TO THE ARPT. AS AN INSTR I AM WELL AWARE OF THE VARYING SIZES OF TFC PATTERNS. I HAVE YET TO SEE A PATTERN FLOWN AT AN UNCTLED FIELD THIS LARGE. NO OTHER ACFT WERE PRESENT IN THE PATTERN AT THE TIME. THE WIND WAS CALM. I CAN SEE NO REASON FOR A PATTERN THIS LARGE IN A SMALL AIRPLANE AT 800'. A REQUIREMENT OF OPS IN TFC PATTERNS AND PATTERN ENTRIES DURING BFRS IS A POSSIBLE SOLUTION.

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.