Narrative:

This incident occurred on a VFR day with +20 SM visibility at 4500 ft and no clouds. We were on a VFR cross country training flight from melbourne international to daytona beach international. 1/2 way through the cruise portion of our flight, a near midair collision occurred with a white and orange GA twin engine airplane. The airplane crossed our path (10 ft vertical, 20 ft horizontal) from west to east or left to right. We had a ground track of 348 degrees giving us our cruise altitude of 4500 ft. Our altimeter setting was given to us by patrick approach whom had recently released us from flight following (incident occurred in less than 5 mins from release of patrick approach). Before contacting daytona beach approach for further flight following, we tuned into daytona's ATIS for information. The incident occurred at this time. I used evasive action (full forward yoke to fly under the other airplane) and missed by a small margin. In reviewing the number of errors that led to the incident, I discovered the following: 1) lack of flight following for additional collision avoidance precaution. 2) conflicting aircraft at 4500 ft not respecting the hemispheric rule. The other airplane was on a track of due east which should have put it at an altitude of odd thousand +500 ft (3500 ft, 5500 ft, etc), not 4500 ft. The similar altitude may have made it more difficult to see since the airplane was at a distance on the horizon. 3) student in the left seat had his head down in the cockpit working on his navigation log ignoring his scanning technique. The safety improvement I will recommended to my students now to ignore the flight log completely until flight following/TA service has been confirmed. Once service is confirmed, constant scanning will be done at longer intervals with shorter intervals for the navigation log. 4) my view, the right seat instructor, was blocked on the left side from where the airplane approached by the student sitting in the left seat. I did not catch the view of the other airplane until it was on the left side of the front windshield. 5) I was not expecting or wary of the situation that was going to occur. From my perspective, we followed all FARS and still this incident occurred because somebody else was not. No identify or communication with the other aircraft was made.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC BTWN A LOW SEL CRUISING NWBOUND AND AN SMA TWIN CRUISING EBOUND AT 4500 FT, A WRONG ALT FOR ITS DIRECTION. THE SEL RPTR INSTRUCTOR PLT DIVED THE ACFT TO PROVIDE SOME SEPARATION.

Narrative: THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED ON A VFR DAY WITH +20 SM VISIBILITY AT 4500 FT AND NO CLOUDS. WE WERE ON A VFR XCOUNTRY TRAINING FLT FROM MELBOURNE INTL TO DAYTONA BEACH INTL. 1/2 WAY THROUGH THE CRUISE PORTION OF OUR FLT, A NMAC OCCURRED WITH A WHITE AND ORANGE GA TWIN ENG AIRPLANE. THE AIRPLANE CROSSED OUR PATH (10 FT VERT, 20 FT HORIZ) FROM W TO E OR L TO R. WE HAD A GND TRACK OF 348 DEGS GIVING US OUR CRUISE ALT OF 4500 FT. OUR ALTIMETER SETTING WAS GIVEN TO US BY PATRICK APCH WHOM HAD RECENTLY RELEASED US FROM FLT FOLLOWING (INCIDENT OCCURRED IN LESS THAN 5 MINS FROM RELEASE OF PATRICK APCH). BEFORE CONTACTING DAYTONA BEACH APCH FOR FURTHER FLT FOLLOWING, WE TUNED INTO DAYTONA'S ATIS FOR INFO. THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AT THIS TIME. I USED EVASIVE ACTION (FULL FORWARD YOKE TO FLY UNDER THE OTHER AIRPLANE) AND MISSED BY A SMALL MARGIN. IN REVIEWING THE NUMBER OF ERRORS THAT LED TO THE INCIDENT, I DISCOVERED THE FOLLOWING: 1) LACK OF FLT FOLLOWING FOR ADDITIONAL COLLISION AVOIDANCE PRECAUTION. 2) CONFLICTING ACFT AT 4500 FT NOT RESPECTING THE HEMISPHERIC RULE. THE OTHER AIRPLANE WAS ON A TRACK OF DUE E WHICH SHOULD HAVE PUT IT AT AN ALT OF ODD THOUSAND +500 FT (3500 FT, 5500 FT, ETC), NOT 4500 FT. THE SIMILAR ALT MAY HAVE MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO SEE SINCE THE AIRPLANE WAS AT A DISTANCE ON THE HORIZON. 3) STUDENT IN THE L SEAT HAD HIS HEAD DOWN IN THE COCKPIT WORKING ON HIS NAV LOG IGNORING HIS SCANNING TECHNIQUE. THE SAFETY IMPROVEMENT I WILL RECOMMENDED TO MY STUDENTS NOW TO IGNORE THE FLT LOG COMPLETELY UNTIL FLT FOLLOWING/TA SVC HAS BEEN CONFIRMED. ONCE SVC IS CONFIRMED, CONSTANT SCANNING WILL BE DONE AT LONGER INTERVALS WITH SHORTER INTERVALS FOR THE NAV LOG. 4) MY VIEW, THE R SEAT INSTRUCTOR, WAS BLOCKED ON THE L SIDE FROM WHERE THE AIRPLANE APCHED BY THE STUDENT SITTING IN THE L SEAT. I DID NOT CATCH THE VIEW OF THE OTHER AIRPLANE UNTIL IT WAS ON THE L SIDE OF THE FRONT WINDSHIELD. 5) I WAS NOT EXPECTING OR WARY OF THE SIT THAT WAS GOING TO OCCUR. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WE FOLLOWED ALL FARS AND STILL THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE WAS NOT. NO IDENT OR COM WITH THE OTHER ACFT WAS MADE.

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.