Narrative:

I was flying a single engine airplane at an uncontrolled airport. I entered the pattern at a 45 degree angle and proceeded to fly the downwind leg of the pattern. While on the downwind leg a twin engine airplane crossed the pattern at a 90 degree angle a few hundred ft above pattern altitude and 1/4 mi in front of me. This was done in spite of the fact that I was already in the pattern and had right-of-way. I observed the twin engine airplane as it crossed my path in the pattern. Since the twin engine airplane was a few hundred ft above my altitude, 1/4 mi ahead of me and flying faster than me, I realized that we were not on a collision course. In any event, I pulled back on the throttle in order to slow my airspeed so as not to get any closer to the twin engine than I already was. A contributing factor to the problem is the likely possibility that I was on the wrong CTAF. However, a radio is not required at an uncontrolled airport since there is not a tower a the airport. Therefore, whether I was on the right frequency or not did not change the fact that I had the right-of-way since I was already in the pattern and it was the responsibility of the twin engine to stay clear of the traffic already in the pattern. Pilots are supposed to use 'see and avoid' procedures at uncontrolled airports, which the pilot of the twin engine did not adequately do. Had the pilot of the twin engine used proper 'see and avoid' procedures, the problem would have been avoided.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PVT PLT OF A CHAMPION 76C-AA, SLOWED TO HELP PROVIDE MORE DISTANCE BTWN HIM AND ANOTHER ACFT XING IN FRONT OF HIM ON THE DOWNWIND LEG IN THE TFC PATTERN AT AN UNCTLED ARPT.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING A SINGLE ENG AIRPLANE AT AN UNCTLED ARPT. I ENTERED THE PATTERN AT A 45 DEG ANGLE AND PROCEEDED TO FLY THE DOWNWIND LEG OF THE PATTERN. WHILE ON THE DOWNWIND LEG A TWIN ENG AIRPLANE CROSSED THE PATTERN AT A 90 DEG ANGLE A FEW HUNDRED FT ABOVE PATTERN ALT AND 1/4 MI IN FRONT OF ME. THIS WAS DONE IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT I WAS ALREADY IN THE PATTERN AND HAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. I OBSERVED THE TWIN ENG AIRPLANE AS IT CROSSED MY PATH IN THE PATTERN. SINCE THE TWIN ENG AIRPLANE WAS A FEW HUNDRED FT ABOVE MY ALT, 1/4 MI AHEAD OF ME AND FLYING FASTER THAN ME, I REALIZED THAT WE WERE NOT ON A COLLISION COURSE. IN ANY EVENT, I PULLED BACK ON THE THROTTLE IN ORDER TO SLOW MY AIRSPD SO AS NOT TO GET ANY CLOSER TO THE TWIN ENG THAN I ALREADY WAS. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE PROB IS THE LIKELY POSSIBILITY THAT I WAS ON THE WRONG CTAF. HOWEVER, A RADIO IS NOT REQUIRED AT AN UNCTLED ARPT SINCE THERE IS NOT A TWR A THE ARPT. THEREFORE, WHETHER I WAS ON THE RIGHT FREQ OR NOT DID NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT I HAD THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SINCE I WAS ALREADY IN THE PATTERN AND IT WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TWIN ENG TO STAY CLR OF THE TFC ALREADY IN THE PATTERN. PLTS ARE SUPPOSED TO USE 'SEE AND AVOID' PROCS AT UNCTLED ARPTS, WHICH THE PLT OF THE TWIN ENG DID NOT ADEQUATELY DO. HAD THE PLT OF THE TWIN ENG USED PROPER 'SEE AND AVOID' PROCS, THE PROB WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED.

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.