Narrative:

My student and I were on a training flight out of chandler municipal headed for casa grande municipal for touch-and-goes at an uncontrolled field (cgz). Approximately 10 mi north of cgz we tuned in the AWOS on the field and noted that the wind was reported as 270-300 degrees steady at 5 KTS with gusts to 10 KTS. Since nobody else was in the traffic pattern or talking on unicom, we announced that we would enter right traffic for runway 23. We then entered the pattern on a 45 degree entry to right downwind and proceeded to execute several touch-and-goes, all the while making all the necessary radio calls. After we had executed 2 touch-and-goes, an aircraft (a bonanza) announced that he was over stanfield VOR (tfd) inbound on the ILS approach to runway 5. We continued to make right traffic to runway 23 and advised the aircraft that the winds favored runway 23 and asked what his intentions were. He stated that he would execute a missed approach to return to the VOR. He (the pilot of the bonanza) called short final for runway 5 as we were on a right downwind to runway 23. As we called right base for runway 23 (after the bonanza had made a turn south out of the pattern), the pilot of the bonanza called us and said 'you are going the wrong way, turn right immediately.' a small debate over the radio ensued over use of the runway, even though we were making the correct traffic pattern for runway favored by the wind. We continued our course and shortly thereafter made a right turn to final approach to runway 23. As we turned final, a beech baron (owned and operated by the same company as the bonanza) announced left downwind for runway 5 and stated he would be making touch-and-goes. As we were touching down, I noticed the baron turning final for runway 5. At that point I decided to make a full stop and try to avoid a collision by taking off towards the baron. My student was flying and landed slightly long. As we were about to exit the runway at the end, the baron initiated a go around. At that time, another aircraft (owned by the same company as the baron and bonanza) reported FAF inbound on the ILS for runway 5. In order to avoid confrontation by taxiing back and taking off against traffic, I took control of the aircraft and turned around on the runway and took off on runway 5 (downwind). I then returned control of the aircraft to my student and we departed the pattern to the north to return to chandler municipal to complete our lesson. At approximately 5 mi north of casa grande municipal, the baron that had to go around earlier came up beside us (at our 3 O'clock within 100 ft horizontal), chastised us on the radio and made a hard left turn in front of us, at which time I pushed the yoke firmly forward and descended to avoid a midair collision. (I descended from 1500 ft AGL to 1300 ft AGL.) the contributing factors to this incident were: 1) the bonanza, baron, and aircraft on the instrument approach (all owned and operated by same company) neglected to check AWOS or wind direction or give any consideration to the aircraft already established in the pattern making r-hand traffic for runway 23 (the runway preferred by the wind). 2) the baron entering the pattern for touch-and-goes not giving way to the aircraft on final (aircraft plted by myself and my student) and continuing his approach almost to touchdown while we were still on the runway. 3) the third aircraft (who called final approach fix inbound) stating that he, too, would be landing on runway 5, even though he should have circled to land on runway 23. 4) the complete and utter disregard for safety by the pilot of the baron who buzzed our aircraft (myself and my student) and nearly caused a midair collision. This problem could be corrected by pilots listening to AWOS and/or checking wind direction visually and making the appropriate pattern for the runway favored by the wind, or for aircraft on the instrument approach, if winds favor a different runway, breaking off the approach and circling to land or executing a missed approach so as not to conflict with traffic in the pattern. Also, the pilot of the baron executing a go around sooner and giving way to the lower aircraft (us) would have been the correct thing to do as per the right-of-way rules listed in far 91.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN SMA TRAINING FLT SUFFERS AN INTENTIONAL BE58 BARON CLOSE FLY-BY CREATING AN NMAC. BARON PLT HAD BEEN OPPOSITE DIRECTION TFC IN TFC PATTERN AT CGZ PREVIOUSLY AND HAD TO MAKE A GAR FOR SMA AS LNDG TFC.

Narrative: MY STUDENT AND I WERE ON A TRAINING FLT OUT OF CHANDLER MUNICIPAL HEADED FOR CASA GRANDE MUNICIPAL FOR TOUCH-AND-GOES AT AN UNCTLED FIELD (CGZ). APPROX 10 MI N OF CGZ WE TUNED IN THE AWOS ON THE FIELD AND NOTED THAT THE WIND WAS RPTED AS 270-300 DEGS STEADY AT 5 KTS WITH GUSTS TO 10 KTS. SINCE NOBODY ELSE WAS IN THE TFC PATTERN OR TALKING ON UNICOM, WE ANNOUNCED THAT WE WOULD ENTER R TFC FOR RWY 23. WE THEN ENTERED THE PATTERN ON A 45 DEG ENTRY TO R DOWNWIND AND PROCEEDED TO EXECUTE SEVERAL TOUCH-AND-GOES, ALL THE WHILE MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY RADIO CALLS. AFTER WE HAD EXECUTED 2 TOUCH-AND-GOES, AN ACFT (A BONANZA) ANNOUNCED THAT HE WAS OVER STANFIELD VOR (TFD) INBOUND ON THE ILS APCH TO RWY 5. WE CONTINUED TO MAKE R TFC TO RWY 23 AND ADVISED THE ACFT THAT THE WINDS FAVORED RWY 23 AND ASKED WHAT HIS INTENTIONS WERE. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD EXECUTE A MISSED APCH TO RETURN TO THE VOR. HE (THE PLT OF THE BONANZA) CALLED SHORT FINAL FOR RWY 5 AS WE WERE ON A R DOWNWIND TO RWY 23. AS WE CALLED R BASE FOR RWY 23 (AFTER THE BONANZA HAD MADE A TURN S OUT OF THE PATTERN), THE PLT OF THE BONANZA CALLED US AND SAID 'YOU ARE GOING THE WRONG WAY, TURN R IMMEDIATELY.' A SMALL DEBATE OVER THE RADIO ENSUED OVER USE OF THE RWY, EVEN THOUGH WE WERE MAKING THE CORRECT TFC PATTERN FOR RWY FAVORED BY THE WIND. WE CONTINUED OUR COURSE AND SHORTLY THEREAFTER MADE A R TURN TO FINAL APCH TO RWY 23. AS WE TURNED FINAL, A BEECH BARON (OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE SAME COMPANY AS THE BONANZA) ANNOUNCED L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 5 AND STATED HE WOULD BE MAKING TOUCH-AND-GOES. AS WE WERE TOUCHING DOWN, I NOTICED THE BARON TURNING FINAL FOR RWY 5. AT THAT POINT I DECIDED TO MAKE A FULL STOP AND TRY TO AVOID A COLLISION BY TAKING OFF TOWARDS THE BARON. MY STUDENT WAS FLYING AND LANDED SLIGHTLY LONG. AS WE WERE ABOUT TO EXIT THE RWY AT THE END, THE BARON INITIATED A GAR. AT THAT TIME, ANOTHER ACFT (OWNED BY THE SAME COMPANY AS THE BARON AND BONANZA) RPTED FAF INBOUND ON THE ILS FOR RWY 5. IN ORDER TO AVOID CONFRONTATION BY TAXIING BACK AND TAKING OFF AGAINST TFC, I TOOK CTL OF THE ACFT AND TURNED AROUND ON THE RWY AND TOOK OFF ON RWY 5 (DOWNWIND). I THEN RETURNED CTL OF THE ACFT TO MY STUDENT AND WE DEPARTED THE PATTERN TO THE N TO RETURN TO CHANDLER MUNICIPAL TO COMPLETE OUR LESSON. AT APPROX 5 MI N OF CASA GRANDE MUNICIPAL, THE BARON THAT HAD TO GAR EARLIER CAME UP BESIDE US (AT OUR 3 O'CLOCK WITHIN 100 FT HORIZ), CHASTISED US ON THE RADIO AND MADE A HARD L TURN IN FRONT OF US, AT WHICH TIME I PUSHED THE YOKE FIRMLY FORWARD AND DSNDED TO AVOID A MIDAIR COLLISION. (I DSNDED FROM 1500 FT AGL TO 1300 FT AGL.) THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS INCIDENT WERE: 1) THE BONANZA, BARON, AND ACFT ON THE INST APCH (ALL OWNED AND OPERATED BY SAME COMPANY) NEGLECTED TO CHK AWOS OR WIND DIRECTION OR GIVE ANY CONSIDERATION TO THE ACFT ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE PATTERN MAKING R-HAND TFC FOR RWY 23 (THE RWY PREFERRED BY THE WIND). 2) THE BARON ENTERING THE PATTERN FOR TOUCH-AND-GOES NOT GIVING WAY TO THE ACFT ON FINAL (ACFT PLTED BY MYSELF AND MY STUDENT) AND CONTINUING HIS APCH ALMOST TO TOUCHDOWN WHILE WE WERE STILL ON THE RWY. 3) THE THIRD ACFT (WHO CALLED FINAL APCH FIX INBOUND) STATING THAT HE, TOO, WOULD BE LNDG ON RWY 5, EVEN THOUGH HE SHOULD HAVE CIRCLED TO LAND ON RWY 23. 4) THE COMPLETE AND UTTER DISREGARD FOR SAFETY BY THE PLT OF THE BARON WHO BUZZED OUR ACFT (MYSELF AND MY STUDENT) AND NEARLY CAUSED A MIDAIR COLLISION. THIS PROB COULD BE CORRECTED BY PLTS LISTENING TO AWOS AND/OR CHKING WIND DIRECTION VISUALLY AND MAKING THE APPROPRIATE PATTERN FOR THE RWY FAVORED BY THE WIND, OR FOR ACFT ON THE INST APCH, IF WINDS FAVOR A DIFFERENT RWY, BREAKING OFF THE APCH AND CIRCLING TO LAND OR EXECUTING A MISSED APCH SO AS NOT TO CONFLICT WITH TFC IN THE PATTERN. ALSO, THE PLT OF THE BARON EXECUTING A GAR SOONER AND GIVING WAY TO THE LOWER ACFT (US) WOULD HAVE BEEN THE CORRECT THING TO DO AS PER THE RIGHT-OF-WAY RULES LISTED IN FAR 91.

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.