Pilot deviation in traffic pattern procedure.

Attributes
ACN	189641
Time
Date	199109
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : iws
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl bound lower : 1000 msl bound upper : 1000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 2 Eng, Retractable Gear
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around other
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	VFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	descent : approach other
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 350 flight time total : 1600 flight time type : 12
ASRS Report	189641
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : private
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Approaching the airport after cancelling IFR, released for a straight in approach to the houston airport. I called 2 or 3 times on the appropriate frequency announcing a straight in approach at 5 mi and 3 mi with an initial call 10 mi out. An small aircraft Y started to turn base leg as we approached short final. As the small aircraft Y turned in front of us, we turned around to the right to pass and go around. Standard traffic was in effect. We made a decision to break out to the right due to our speed difference to others in traffic pattern. We came back around for a right base and then final. As we turned onto final another aircraft had turned left base. We were well ahead of the traffic and much faster. From my experience level I was sure without a shadow of a doubt that my maneuver was done with all regards to safety. When I was on the ground the student and instructor in the second aircraft (an small aircraft Z) accused me of not abiding by the left traffic that was in effect at the time. I feel that I deviated for the interest of safety.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT DEV IN TFC PATTERN PROC.

Narrative: APCHING THE ARPT AFTER CANCELLING IFR, RELEASED FOR A STRAIGHT IN APCH TO THE HOUSTON ARPT. I CALLED 2 OR 3 TIMES ON THE APPROPRIATE FREQ ANNOUNCING A STRAIGHT IN APCH AT 5 MI AND 3 MI WITH AN INITIAL CALL 10 MI OUT. AN SMA Y STARTED TO TURN BASE LEG AS WE APCHED SHORT FINAL. AS THE SMA Y TURNED IN FRONT OF US, WE TURNED AROUND TO THE R TO PASS AND GAR. STANDARD TFC WAS IN EFFECT. WE MADE A DECISION TO BREAK OUT TO THE R DUE TO OUR SPD DIFFERENCE TO OTHERS IN TFC PATTERN. WE CAME BACK AROUND FOR A R BASE AND THEN FINAL. AS WE TURNED ONTO FINAL ANOTHER ACFT HAD TURNED L BASE. WE WERE WELL AHEAD OF THE TFC AND MUCH FASTER. FROM MY EXPERIENCE LEVEL I WAS SURE WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT MY MANEUVER WAS DONE WITH ALL REGARDS TO SAFETY. WHEN I WAS ON THE GND THE STUDENT AND INSTRUCTOR IN THE SECOND ACFT (AN SMA Z) ACCUSED ME OF NOT ABIDING BY THE L TFC THAT WAS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME. I FEEL THAT I DEVIATED FOR THE INTEREST OF SAFETY.

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.