 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
During a flight check in a BE76, a pilot examiner reports missing a cessna by 50 ft. The cessna had been told by the ATCT local controller to make a right 360 degree turn for spacing with the BE76 on an ILS approach to the same runway. An argument between the flight crew and ATC ensued.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 336021 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199605 |
| Day | Tue |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : myf |
| State Reference | CA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 2500 msl bound upper : 2500 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Dusk |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tower : myf |
| Operator | general aviation : instructional |
| Make Model Name | Duchess 76 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Small Aircraft |
| Flight Phase | cruise other other |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | Other |
| Function | instruction : instructor |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 14000 flight time type : 3 |
| ASRS Report | 336021 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | Other |
| Function | instruction : trainee |
| Qualification | pilot : commercial |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : nmac non adherence : far |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : insufficient time |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 0 vertical : 50 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
Yesterday, near the completion of a flight check, I had an interesting exchange with myf tower local controller. First the circumstances: we (the applicant and myself) were completing a MEL add-on to his commercial certificate by winding up on an ILS runway 28R approach to myf. The applicant was wearing a hood and the aircraft a BE76. We had just been handed off by approach control and upon checking in with the tower were advised that we had traffic at our 11 O'clock (I can't remember the range or distance) and that the other aircraft was lower and inbound for runway 28R. The other aircraft (a cessna) was issued a similar callout. In both cases it was reported that the other traffic was 'not in sight' or 'looking.' our approximately position was lake murray on the GS and about 2500 ft MSL. The cessna was issued a clearance to make a 'right' 360 degree turn to be sequenced behind us in the duchess. With that, both the applicant and myself increased our search for the traffic knowing the possibility of that other aircraft crossing our flight path. Moments later the applicant, out of the periphery of his vision, glimpsed the cessna appear between the left engine nacelle and fuselage with an expletive followed by my sighting between the fuselage and the right nacelle with a similar remark by me. We passed within 50 ft as the other aircraft continued his right turn. We were about to cross the OM. Seeing that we had a 'very near-miss' (as you can imagine I was quite shaken), I pointed out to the tower that we had missed that cessna by about 50 ft and suggested that perhaps next time the controller might consider having the other aircraft make a 'left' turn. I was asked to repeat -- which I did. The controller then asked if I was ready to copy her phone number so she could be consulted when we got on the ground. I advised her that we would contact her after we got on ground control, which I did once we cleared the runway by means of my portable cellular phone. The male voice on the phone began preaching about professionalism and suggested that I keep my comments off the frequency and use the phone for such remarks. Unable to get a word in edgewise, I listened to his continued berating and when asked if I had any questions, my reply was 'no.' see and avoid rules apply in VMC. We didn't see each other, a fact the tower was aware of (incidently we were on an IFR clearance). Myf tower is not a radar facility. The controllers do, however, use their repeater to advise and often recommend heading and/or altitude changes to avoid other traffic. A 'right' 360 degree turn to sequence an aircraft behind knowingly to cross in front of (or very near) the traffic it is to follow defies logic -- particularly when neither aircraft has visual contact. It is my opinion the comments by me on the radio were appropriate to the circumstances. I was shaken, upset and angry at what amounted to an attempt on my life. I did, however, in attempting to get in a word in edgewise later on the phone, use an expletive. This is my only regret concerning this incident.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: DURING A FLT CHK IN A BE76, A PLT EXAMINER RPTS MISSING A CESSNA BY 50 FT. THE CESSNA HAD BEEN TOLD BY THE ATCT LCL CTLR TO MAKE A R 360 DEG TURN FOR SPACING WITH THE BE76 ON AN ILS APCH TO THE SAME RWY. AN ARGUMENT BTWN THE FLC AND ATC ENSUED.
Narrative: YESTERDAY, NEAR THE COMPLETION OF A FLT CHK, I HAD AN INTERESTING EXCHANGE WITH MYF TWR LCL CTLR. FIRST THE CIRCUMSTANCES: WE (THE APPLICANT AND MYSELF) WERE COMPLETING A MEL ADD-ON TO HIS COMMERCIAL CERTIFICATE BY WINDING UP ON AN ILS RWY 28R APCH TO MYF. THE APPLICANT WAS WEARING A HOOD AND THE ACFT A BE76. WE HAD JUST BEEN HANDED OFF BY APCH CTL AND UPON CHKING IN WITH THE TWR WERE ADVISED THAT WE HAD TFC AT OUR 11 O'CLOCK (I CAN'T REMEMBER THE RANGE OR DISTANCE) AND THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS LOWER AND INBOUND FOR RWY 28R. THE OTHER ACFT (A CESSNA) WAS ISSUED A SIMILAR CALLOUT. IN BOTH CASES IT WAS RPTED THAT THE OTHER TFC WAS 'NOT IN SIGHT' OR 'LOOKING.' OUR APPROX POS WAS LAKE MURRAY ON THE GS AND ABOUT 2500 FT MSL. THE CESSNA WAS ISSUED A CLRNC TO MAKE A 'R' 360 DEG TURN TO BE SEQUENCED BEHIND US IN THE DUCHESS. WITH THAT, BOTH THE APPLICANT AND MYSELF INCREASED OUR SEARCH FOR THE TFC KNOWING THE POSSIBILITY OF THAT OTHER ACFT XING OUR FLT PATH. MOMENTS LATER THE APPLICANT, OUT OF THE PERIPHERY OF HIS VISION, GLIMPSED THE CESSNA APPEAR BTWN THE L ENG NACELLE AND FUSELAGE WITH AN EXPLETIVE FOLLOWED BY MY SIGHTING BTWN THE FUSELAGE AND THE R NACELLE WITH A SIMILAR REMARK BY ME. WE PASSED WITHIN 50 FT AS THE OTHER ACFT CONTINUED HIS R TURN. WE WERE ABOUT TO CROSS THE OM. SEEING THAT WE HAD A 'VERY NEAR-MISS' (AS YOU CAN IMAGINE I WAS QUITE SHAKEN), I POINTED OUT TO THE TWR THAT WE HAD MISSED THAT CESSNA BY ABOUT 50 FT AND SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS NEXT TIME THE CTLR MIGHT CONSIDER HAVING THE OTHER ACFT MAKE A 'L' TURN. I WAS ASKED TO REPEAT -- WHICH I DID. THE CTLR THEN ASKED IF I WAS READY TO COPY HER PHONE NUMBER SO SHE COULD BE CONSULTED WHEN WE GOT ON THE GND. I ADVISED HER THAT WE WOULD CONTACT HER AFTER WE GOT ON GND CTL, WHICH I DID ONCE WE CLRED THE RWY BY MEANS OF MY PORTABLE CELLULAR PHONE. THE MALE VOICE ON THE PHONE BEGAN PREACHING ABOUT PROFESSIONALISM AND SUGGESTED THAT I KEEP MY COMMENTS OFF THE FREQ AND USE THE PHONE FOR SUCH REMARKS. UNABLE TO GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE, I LISTENED TO HIS CONTINUED BERATING AND WHEN ASKED IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS, MY REPLY WAS 'NO.' SEE AND AVOID RULES APPLY IN VMC. WE DIDN'T SEE EACH OTHER, A FACT THE TWR WAS AWARE OF (INCIDENTLY WE WERE ON AN IFR CLRNC). MYF TWR IS NOT A RADAR FACILITY. THE CTLRS DO, HOWEVER, USE THEIR REPEATER TO ADVISE AND OFTEN RECOMMEND HDG AND/OR ALT CHANGES TO AVOID OTHER TFC. A 'R' 360 DEG TURN TO SEQUENCE AN ACFT BEHIND KNOWINGLY TO CROSS IN FRONT OF (OR VERY NEAR) THE TFC IT IS TO FOLLOW DEFIES LOGIC -- PARTICULARLY WHEN NEITHER ACFT HAS VISUAL CONTACT. IT IS MY OPINION THE COMMENTS BY ME ON THE RADIO WERE APPROPRIATE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I WAS SHAKEN, UPSET AND ANGRY AT WHAT AMOUNTED TO AN ATTEMPT ON MY LIFE. I DID, HOWEVER, IN ATTEMPTING TO GET IN A WORD IN EDGEWISE LATER ON THE PHONE, USE AN EXPLETIVE. THIS IS MY ONLY REGRET CONCERNING THIS INCIDENT.
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.