VFR twin cessna had near midair collision with IFR C210. See and avoid concept.

Attributes
ACN	275584
Time
Date	199406
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : saf
State Reference	NM
Altitude	msl bound lower : 7200 msl bound upper : 7200
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : saf
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	other
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	VFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : local
Qualification	controller : non radar
Experience	controller military : 6 controller non radar : 6
ASRS Report	275584
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : private
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : insufficient time
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	horizontal : 0 vertical : 300
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

A twin cessna X reports on frequency 15 north of airport inbound for landing. Approximately 4 mins prior, a cessna 210 Y departed on a IFR flight plan northbound. (VFR tower) the twin cessna X reports 3 mi north of airport approximately 2 mins later and is given landing clearance. As X is taxiing in, he questions why he wasn't given a TA on aircraft north of airport. I look at my departure pad and saw no departures northbound except for the IFR Y. I advise the twin that all I had was the IFR and he shouldn't have been so low on the departure procedure. The X pilot later calls on the phone to further point out how unsafe this procedure is. I agree with him. First we have an IFR departure procedure that should have been followed. The cessna would have been at 10000 ft overfly the airport instead of at 7500 ft. Second I am not sure the X pilot understands the controllers requirements to issue traffic in a class D airspace. If proper procedure and good sound judgement was used by Y, there would have been 3000 ft vertical separation instead of 300 ft.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: VFR TWIN CESSNA HAD NMAC WITH IFR C210. SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT.

Narrative: A TWIN CESSNA X RPTS ON FREQ 15 N OF ARPT INBOUND FOR LNDG. APPROX 4 MINS PRIOR, A CESSNA 210 Y DEPARTED ON A IFR FLT PLAN NBOUND. (VFR TWR) THE TWIN CESSNA X RPTS 3 MI N OF ARPT APPROX 2 MINS LATER AND IS GIVEN LNDG CLRNC. AS X IS TAXIING IN, HE QUESTIONS WHY HE WASN'T GIVEN A TA ON ACFT N OF ARPT. I LOOK AT MY DEP PAD AND SAW NO DEPS NBOUND EXCEPT FOR THE IFR Y. I ADVISE THE TWIN THAT ALL I HAD WAS THE IFR AND HE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SO LOW ON THE DEP PROC. THE X PLT LATER CALLS ON THE PHONE TO FURTHER POINT OUT HOW UNSAFE THIS PROC IS. I AGREE WITH HIM. FIRST WE HAVE AN IFR DEP PROC THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED. THE CESSNA WOULD HAVE BEEN AT 10000 FT OVERFLY THE ARPT INSTEAD OF AT 7500 FT. SECOND I AM NOT SURE THE X PLT UNDERSTANDS THE CTLRS REQUIREMENTS TO ISSUE TFC IN A CLASS D AIRSPACE. IF PROPER PROC AND GOOD SOUND JUDGEMENT WAS USED BY Y, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN 3000 FT VERT SEPARATION INSTEAD OF 300 FT.

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.