Narrative:

We had been cleared for a visual approach to runway 35R by lnk approach and instructed to contact the tower. We contacted the tower and reported approaching right base for runway 35R. At that time tower reported our traffic as 12 O'clock, 7 mi. We acknowledged and said we would look for traffic. Tower told the C172 pilot to enter a right downwind for runway 32. He acknowledged. Tower reported to the C172 our position and the C172 pilot acknowledged traffic in sight. We still did not have the traffic in sight. I was the PNF and I continued to look for the traffic at 12 O'clock. We were on base leg, with approach flaps, gear down and landing and taxi lights on. Prior to turning final we heard the tower instruct the C172 to turn to 170 degree heading. Mentally I still had the C172 west of the airport. We were approaching from the east. Original report was 7 mi from us and this is not more than a min later. As we are turning final, I see the C172 heading directly toward us and not more than 200 ft apart. I grabbed the control wheel and increased the bank to miss the C172. The only comment from the C172 was 'that was close.' I talked to the tower operator later by telephone and he said the C172 had taken a northerly heading when he was instructed to enter a downwind and they were not aware of it. I feel the tower personnel were not alert and did not visually monitor our track. They were very apologetic but lacked a good explanation. Big lesson for me is: don't assume the other aircraft is going to maintain separation when they say they have you in sight. If he did have us in sight, why did he allow his airplane to get that close to us?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CORPORATE TWIN HAS NMAC WITH C172 AS HE WAS TURNING FINAL TO RWY 35R, LNK. C172 HAD THE TWIN IN SIGHT, SO HE SAID. PIC OF TWIN GRABS WHEEL AND EVADES C172 AT 200 FT SEPARATION. NO TFC SEPARATION TECHNIQUES PROVIDED BY TWR OTHER THAN TFC POINTOUT.

Narrative: WE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 35R BY LNK APCH AND INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT THE TWR. WE CONTACTED THE TWR AND RPTED APCHING R BASE FOR RWY 35R. AT THAT TIME TWR RPTED OUR TFC AS 12 O'CLOCK, 7 MI. WE ACKNOWLEDGED AND SAID WE WOULD LOOK FOR TFC. TWR TOLD THE C172 PLT TO ENTER A R DOWNWIND FOR RWY 32. HE ACKNOWLEDGED. TWR RPTED TO THE C172 OUR POS AND THE C172 PLT ACKNOWLEDGED TFC IN SIGHT. WE STILL DID NOT HAVE THE TFC IN SIGHT. I WAS THE PNF AND I CONTINUED TO LOOK FOR THE TFC AT 12 O'CLOCK. WE WERE ON BASE LEG, WITH APCH FLAPS, GEAR DOWN AND LNDG AND TAXI LIGHTS ON. PRIOR TO TURNING FINAL WE HEARD THE TWR INSTRUCT THE C172 TO TURN TO 170 DEG HDG. MENTALLY I STILL HAD THE C172 W OF THE ARPT. WE WERE APCHING FROM THE E. ORIGINAL RPT WAS 7 MI FROM US AND THIS IS NOT MORE THAN A MIN LATER. AS WE ARE TURNING FINAL, I SEE THE C172 HDG DIRECTLY TOWARD US AND NOT MORE THAN 200 FT APART. I GRABBED THE CTL WHEEL AND INCREASED THE BANK TO MISS THE C172. THE ONLY COMMENT FROM THE C172 WAS 'THAT WAS CLOSE.' I TALKED TO THE TWR OPERATOR LATER BY TELEPHONE AND HE SAID THE C172 HAD TAKEN A NORTHERLY HDG WHEN HE WAS INSTRUCTED TO ENTER A DOWNWIND AND THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF IT. I FEEL THE TWR PERSONNEL WERE NOT ALERT AND DID NOT VISUALLY MONITOR OUR TRACK. THEY WERE VERY APOLOGETIC BUT LACKED A GOOD EXPLANATION. BIG LESSON FOR ME IS: DON'T ASSUME THE OTHER ACFT IS GOING TO MAINTAIN SEPARATION WHEN THEY SAY THEY HAVE YOU IN SIGHT. IF HE DID HAVE US IN SIGHT, WHY DID HE ALLOW HIS AIRPLANE TO GET THAT CLOSE TO US?

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.