Narrative:

Anatomy of a flight incident. Trying to understand an incident can be confounded by such conflicting pilot eyewitness accounts as the following: at about 100 ft taking off in my small plane 1) on a southeast runway, I was startled at hearing and then seeing a twin, 2) aircraft zooming down the runway almost directly under my left window. Immediately feeling much remiss at not having seen him on final before my takeoff, I was yet defensively angry that he had room to go under me and then not land, but pull up and go around again in what I probably mistook to be cowboy fashion. Anyway, I also went around the pattern -- inside of his and much closer in, to watch him land before going off on my west heading. Later back at the hanger, I was told this pilot was looking for me with blood in his eye! And today he drove in to the hangar and confronted me saying I nearly caused him to crash -- all because I did not have a radio as I should, so that I could have heard his repeated calls. Now that may be, as I know nothing of what went on with him until he appeared so frighteningly below me. However, I did search the sky in a slow 360 degree taxi turn before finally taking the active. What puzzles me are the huge and irreconcilable differences in his account from mine. To be sure, yes if I'd had a radio and heard him asking 'what is that jerk on the ground going to do' I would not have taken off. But -- first he insists he had me in view at all times, and yet never saw me make the 360 degree taxi turn before pulling out -- even denying that I made the turn! He also insists he went around me to the right, which if true, would have made it impossible for me to see him unless I were banked steeply right to see out that window! Finally, he insisted that I did not go around but instead flew off directly to the southwest -- not even looking to see if he was alright, etc. These insistings are incomprehensible and it's hard to believe that a pilot of his station and experience could make them! In continuing to puzzle over these, I remember briefly talking to this pilot a few months back at the airport terminal when the futuristic-looking beech STAR-ship was there. He seemed then not to know that the STAR-ship was designed with the contracted help of mr X, and, indeed, he insisted that it never happened! While I didn't press the matter, I thought it a bit strange at the time, considering his familiarity with the STAR-ship. But now at this point, and as a retired psychologist still analyzing behavior, it appears to me that this pilot, as dynamic and forceful as he deny them or insist they never happened. For my part in this incident, the man is right, I should get a portable radio. 1947 aeronca chief without electrical system. Beech baron.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC AT NON TWR ARPT AS AERONCA TAKES OFF AND BARON IS LNDG.

Narrative: ANATOMY OF A FLT INCIDENT. TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AN INCIDENT CAN BE CONFOUNDED BY SUCH CONFLICTING PLT EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS AS THE FOLLOWING: AT ABOUT 100 FT TAKING OFF IN MY SMALL PLANE 1) ON A SE RWY, I WAS STARTLED AT HEARING AND THEN SEEING A TWIN, 2) ACFT ZOOMING DOWN THE RWY ALMOST DIRECTLY UNDER MY L WINDOW. IMMEDIATELY FEELING MUCH REMISS AT NOT HAVING SEEN HIM ON FINAL BEFORE MY TKOF, I WAS YET DEFENSIVELY ANGRY THAT HE HAD ROOM TO GO UNDER ME AND THEN NOT LAND, BUT PULL UP AND GAR AGAIN IN WHAT I PROBABLY MISTOOK TO BE COWBOY FASHION. ANYWAY, I ALSO WENT AROUND THE PATTERN -- INSIDE OF HIS AND MUCH CLOSER IN, TO WATCH HIM LAND BEFORE GOING OFF ON MY W HDG. LATER BACK AT THE HANGER, I WAS TOLD THIS PLT WAS LOOKING FOR ME WITH BLOOD IN HIS EYE! AND TODAY HE DROVE IN TO THE HANGAR AND CONFRONTED ME SAYING I NEARLY CAUSED HIM TO CRASH -- ALL BECAUSE I DID NOT HAVE A RADIO AS I SHOULD, SO THAT I COULD HAVE HEARD HIS REPEATED CALLS. NOW THAT MAY BE, AS I KNOW NOTHING OF WHAT WENT ON WITH HIM UNTIL HE APPEARED SO FRIGHTENINGLY BELOW ME. HOWEVER, I DID SEARCH THE SKY IN A SLOW 360 DEG TAXI TURN BEFORE FINALLY TAKING THE ACTIVE. WHAT PUZZLES ME ARE THE HUGE AND IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES IN HIS ACCOUNT FROM MINE. TO BE SURE, YES IF I'D HAD A RADIO AND HEARD HIM ASKING 'WHAT IS THAT JERK ON THE GND GOING TO DO' I WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN OFF. BUT -- FIRST HE INSISTS HE HAD ME IN VIEW AT ALL TIMES, AND YET NEVER SAW ME MAKE THE 360 DEG TAXI TURN BEFORE PULLING OUT -- EVEN DENYING THAT I MADE THE TURN! HE ALSO INSISTS HE WENT AROUND ME TO THE R, WHICH IF TRUE, WOULD HAVE MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO SEE HIM UNLESS I WERE BANKED STEEPLY R TO SEE OUT THAT WINDOW! FINALLY, HE INSISTED THAT I DID NOT GAR BUT INSTEAD FLEW OFF DIRECTLY TO THE SW -- NOT EVEN LOOKING TO SEE IF HE WAS ALRIGHT, ETC. THESE INSISTINGS ARE INCOMPREHENSIBLE AND IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT A PLT OF HIS STATION AND EXPERIENCE COULD MAKE THEM! IN CONTINUING TO PUZZLE OVER THESE, I REMEMBER BRIEFLY TALKING TO THIS PLT A FEW MONTHS BACK AT THE ARPT TERMINAL WHEN THE FUTURISTIC-LOOKING BEECH STAR-SHIP WAS THERE. HE SEEMED THEN NOT TO KNOW THAT THE STAR-SHIP WAS DESIGNED WITH THE CONTRACTED HELP OF MR X, AND, INDEED, HE INSISTED THAT IT NEVER HAPPENED! WHILE I DIDN'T PRESS THE MATTER, I THOUGHT IT A BIT STRANGE AT THE TIME, CONSIDERING HIS FAMILIARITY WITH THE STAR-SHIP. BUT NOW AT THIS POINT, AND AS A RETIRED PSYCHOLOGIST STILL ANALYZING BEHAVIOR, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS PLT, AS DYNAMIC AND FORCEFUL AS HE DENY THEM OR INSIST THEY NEVER HAPPENED. FOR MY PART IN THIS INCIDENT, THE MAN IS RIGHT, I SHOULD GET A PORTABLE RADIO. 1947 AERONCA CHIEF WITHOUT ELECTRICAL SYS. BEECH BARON.

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.