Narrative:

As I entered the traffic pattern at iza on a left crosswind entry over the departure end of runway 26 at 1800 ft MSL and reported that position over the unicom frequency, I heard an aerostar report a 5 mi straight-in from the 'dam.' I proceeded into a tight left downwind leg behind a C150. I turned left base over road (1/4 mi or less) and heard aerostar call 2 1/2 mi final and saw him beyond the highway. I could not see his landing gear out but landing lights were on. I proceeded to land and turn off the runway and then saw aerostar going around. The unicom operator advised the 'aircraft on straight-in at iza.' that iza uses left traffic for runway 26 on wkends. This call was made just before I turned base. After aerostar landed and unloaded his passenger (I was told that aerostar was being operated as a part 135 carrier) the pilot came to my aircraft and confronted me and claimed that I cut him out of the pattern, as he claimed that calling a 5 mi and 2 1/2 mi final, straight-in, gave him priority for the runway. I explained that I felt that he was 'cutting corners' and operating unsafely by doing a very fast, long, straight- in approach to an uncontrolled field on a busy wkend. I suggested that an overhead approach (upwind) to the traffic pattern would be a safer approach. He did not agree. I suggest that the FAA publish and provide to uncontrolled airports a written procedure that may be posted for pilots to see, stating the proper traffic pattern entries that may be used.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN SMA PLT RPTS THAT HE WAS CONFRONTED BY AN SMT PLT THAT HAD TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION GAR WHEN THE RPTR LANDED IN FRONT OF THE SMT AT AN UNCTLED ARPT UNICOM. IMPROPER TFC PATTERN PROC BY SMT.

Narrative: AS I ENTERED THE TFC PATTERN AT IZA ON A L XWIND ENTRY OVER THE DEP END OF RWY 26 AT 1800 FT MSL AND RPTED THAT POS OVER THE UNICOM FREQ, I HEARD AN AEROSTAR RPT A 5 MI STRAIGHT-IN FROM THE 'DAM.' I PROCEEDED INTO A TIGHT L DOWNWIND LEG BEHIND A C150. I TURNED L BASE OVER ROAD (1/4 MI OR LESS) AND HEARD AEROSTAR CALL 2 1/2 MI FINAL AND SAW HIM BEYOND THE HWY. I COULD NOT SEE HIS LNDG GEAR OUT BUT LNDG LIGHTS WERE ON. I PROCEEDED TO LAND AND TURN OFF THE RWY AND THEN SAW AEROSTAR GOING AROUND. THE UNICOM OPERATOR ADVISED THE 'ACFT ON STRAIGHT-IN AT IZA.' THAT IZA USES L TFC FOR RWY 26 ON WKENDS. THIS CALL WAS MADE JUST BEFORE I TURNED BASE. AFTER AEROSTAR LANDED AND UNLOADED HIS PAX (I WAS TOLD THAT AEROSTAR WAS BEING OPERATED AS A PART 135 CARRIER) THE PLT CAME TO MY ACFT AND CONFRONTED ME AND CLAIMED THAT I CUT HIM OUT OF THE PATTERN, AS HE CLAIMED THAT CALLING A 5 MI AND 2 1/2 MI FINAL, STRAIGHT-IN, GAVE HIM PRIORITY FOR THE RWY. I EXPLAINED THAT I FELT THAT HE WAS 'CUTTING CORNERS' AND OPERATING UNSAFELY BY DOING A VERY FAST, LONG, STRAIGHT- IN APCH TO AN UNCTLED FIELD ON A BUSY WKEND. I SUGGESTED THAT AN OVERHEAD APCH (UPWIND) TO THE TFC PATTERN WOULD BE A SAFER APCH. HE DID NOT AGREE. I SUGGEST THAT THE FAA PUBLISH AND PROVIDE TO UNCTLED ARPTS A WRITTEN PROC THAT MAY BE POSTED FOR PLTS TO SEE, STATING THE PROPER TFC PATTERN ENTRIES THAT MAY BE USED.

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.