Narrative:

While on base leg to land on runway 35 at the aurora state airport we heard a radio call indicating another aircraft at our altitude to our right. He could not hear our radio calls, but did announce intention to follow and 'keep an eye on them.' he stayed approximately 500 ft (maybe up to 1000 ft) behind all the way down. We did a touch-and-go. After we were airborne he announced a go around, closed to within 150 ft and held his position, approximately 50-100 ft higher, on our right side. We lost sight of him numerous times, until, on downwind, he announced his intention to pass and land. He passed approximately 100 ft over and 150 ft to the right, then executed a short field landing, exiting on the first exit (900 ft from threshold). We met for a vigorous and non productive discussion. His basic position was simple: he didn't hear us on the radio, so we were unsafe and his flying was justified. My basic position: he deliberately attempted to intimidate us in the pattern and on the runway. It cannot be easy for an rg with 1 occupant to match speeds (72-75 mph) with a climbing C150 that has 2 occupants. He may have been in a pattern, or he may have been entering on the base leg. It doesn't matter because he was on my side of the plane regardless, and I should have seen him, and taken some kind of evasive earlier. My impression: he felt he was cut off in the pattern, and was going to teach us a lesson. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter says a prevalent thought among pilots today is: 'I don't hear anybody on the radio, so there must not be anyone out there.' when the reporter and the conflicting aircraft's pilot 'had some words,' the other pilot's position was he didn't hear reporter on the radio, so they were the ones who were unsafe. The reporter observes many flight incidents and he believes pilots rely on their radios to alert them of traffic. Many airplanes don't have radios and are still legal to fly so the far 91.113 to see and avoid takes priority. It was apparent to reporter that the pilot of the other aircraft was deliberately flying close to intimidate. Other pilot was upset because he perceived that reporter had cut him out of the pattern, when in fact reporter was in the pattern first and had been making radio calls. Reporter says he since has conferred with 'older, wiser pilots' who have suggested in the future if such an event occurs, to immediately descend and land, then wait for situation to clear.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CONFLICT AIRBORNE LESS SEVERE. ONE UPSMANSHIP IN TFC PATTERN. NMAC. UNAUTH FORMATION FLT.

Narrative: WHILE ON BASE LEG TO LAND ON RWY 35 AT THE AURORA STATE ARPT WE HEARD A RADIO CALL INDICATING ANOTHER ACFT AT OUR ALT TO OUR R. HE COULD NOT HEAR OUR RADIO CALLS, BUT DID ANNOUNCE INTENTION TO FOLLOW AND 'KEEP AN EYE ON THEM.' HE STAYED APPROX 500 FT (MAYBE UP TO 1000 FT) BEHIND ALL THE WAY DOWN. WE DID A TOUCH-AND-GO. AFTER WE WERE AIRBORNE HE ANNOUNCED A GAR, CLOSED TO WITHIN 150 FT AND HELD HIS POS, APPROX 50-100 FT HIGHER, ON OUR R SIDE. WE LOST SIGHT OF HIM NUMEROUS TIMES, UNTIL, ON DOWNWIND, HE ANNOUNCED HIS INTENTION TO PASS AND LAND. HE PASSED APPROX 100 FT OVER AND 150 FT TO THE R, THEN EXECUTED A SHORT FIELD LNDG, EXITING ON THE FIRST EXIT (900 FT FROM THRESHOLD). WE MET FOR A VIGOROUS AND NON PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION. HIS BASIC POS WAS SIMPLE: HE DIDN'T HEAR US ON THE RADIO, SO WE WERE UNSAFE AND HIS FLYING WAS JUSTIFIED. MY BASIC POS: HE DELIBERATELY ATTEMPTED TO INTIMIDATE US IN THE PATTERN AND ON THE RWY. IT CANNOT BE EASY FOR AN RG WITH 1 OCCUPANT TO MATCH SPDS (72-75 MPH) WITH A CLBING C150 THAT HAS 2 OCCUPANTS. HE MAY HAVE BEEN IN A PATTERN, OR HE MAY HAVE BEEN ENTERING ON THE BASE LEG. IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE HE WAS ON MY SIDE OF THE PLANE REGARDLESS, AND I SHOULD HAVE SEEN HIM, AND TAKEN SOME KIND OF EVASIVE EARLIER. MY IMPRESSION: HE FELT HE WAS CUT OFF IN THE PATTERN, AND WAS GOING TO TEACH US A LESSON. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SAYS A PREVALENT THOUGHT AMONG PLTS TODAY IS: 'I DON'T HEAR ANYBODY ON THE RADIO, SO THERE MUST NOT BE ANYONE OUT THERE.' WHEN THE RPTR AND THE CONFLICTING ACFT'S PLT 'HAD SOME WORDS,' THE OTHER PLT'S POS WAS HE DIDN'T HEAR RPTR ON THE RADIO, SO THEY WERE THE ONES WHO WERE UNSAFE. THE RPTR OBSERVES MANY FLT INCIDENTS AND HE BELIEVES PLTS RELY ON THEIR RADIOS TO ALERT THEM OF TFC. MANY AIRPLANES DON'T HAVE RADIOS AND ARE STILL LEGAL TO FLY SO THE FAR 91.113 TO SEE AND AVOID TAKES PRIORITY. IT WAS APPARENT TO RPTR THAT THE PLT OF THE OTHER ACFT WAS DELIBERATELY FLYING CLOSE TO INTIMIDATE. OTHER PLT WAS UPSET BECAUSE HE PERCEIVED THAT RPTR HAD CUT HIM OUT OF THE PATTERN, WHEN IN FACT RPTR WAS IN THE PATTERN FIRST AND HAD BEEN MAKING RADIO CALLS. RPTR SAYS HE SINCE HAS CONFERRED WITH 'OLDER, WISER PLTS' WHO HAVE SUGGESTED IN THE FUTURE IF SUCH AN EVENT OCCURS, TO IMMEDIATELY DSND AND LAND, THEN WAIT FOR SIT TO CLR.

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.