Narrative:

The chicago sectional lists an incorrect CTAF for C59. I was on a sunday afternoon pleasure flight, gyy-C59-gyy. The WX was cavu. Before departure from gyy, I got a phone briefing from kankakee FSS. The briefer said he had no NOTAMS for C59, but a 'note in his file' said that the CTAF for C59 was 122.9. The sectional says 122.7. The navigation database in my LORAN says 122.9. Approaching C59, I used 122.9 to request 'winds and active.' no response. Flew over field at 1500 ft AGL, saw no activity, no indication of active runway. Based on nearby smoke drift, my ground speed and crab angle, I estimated winds of 300 degrees at 5 KTS. This was consistent with nearby ATIS's and other airports landing on runway 36. I flew 2 touch-and-goes on runway 36, using standard traffic pattern, self-announcing on 122.9. As I departed runway 36, after my second touch-and-go, a beechcraft bonanza was approaching to land in the opposite direction. We each veered to our respective right's, missing by 100-200 ft. After climbing and leveling off, I switched to 122.7 and (sure enough) the bonanza was self-announcing on that frequency. At my suggestion, he switched to 122.9. Later, I heard other traffic using 122.9 for CTAF at C59. Also, I suspect the bonanza was flying a straight-in practice NDB approach to runway 18. He did not fly a standard traffic pattern. This near miss was caused by: 1) confusion as to the appropriate CTAF for C59. 2) the bonanza pilot's failure to fly a standard traffic pattern, continuing his straight-in approach into the air traffic area. Recommendations: 1) make the effective date of CTAF frequencys coincide with the issuance of the related sectionals. 2) or, as a weak substitute, issue a NOTAM that remains effective until the next sectional is issued, reflecting the new CTAF. 3) continue emphasizing the importance of standard traffic patterns.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C172 PLT, USING A JUST-PUBLISHED NEW CTAF FREQ EXPERIENCED AN NMAC AT C59 WITH A BONANZA USING THE OLD FREQ.

Narrative: THE CHICAGO SECTIONAL LISTS AN INCORRECT CTAF FOR C59. I WAS ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON PLEASURE FLT, GYY-C59-GYY. THE WX WAS CAVU. BEFORE DEP FROM GYY, I GOT A PHONE BRIEFING FROM KANKAKEE FSS. THE BRIEFER SAID HE HAD NO NOTAMS FOR C59, BUT A 'NOTE IN HIS FILE' SAID THAT THE CTAF FOR C59 WAS 122.9. THE SECTIONAL SAYS 122.7. THE NAV DATABASE IN MY LORAN SAYS 122.9. APCHING C59, I USED 122.9 TO REQUEST 'WINDS AND ACTIVE.' NO RESPONSE. FLEW OVER FIELD AT 1500 FT AGL, SAW NO ACTIVITY, NO INDICATION OF ACTIVE RWY. BASED ON NEARBY SMOKE DRIFT, MY GND SPD AND CRAB ANGLE, I ESTIMATED WINDS OF 300 DEGS AT 5 KTS. THIS WAS CONSISTENT WITH NEARBY ATIS'S AND OTHER ARPTS LNDG ON RWY 36. I FLEW 2 TOUCH-AND-GOES ON RWY 36, USING STANDARD TFC PATTERN, SELF-ANNOUNCING ON 122.9. AS I DEPARTED RWY 36, AFTER MY SECOND TOUCH-AND-GO, A BEECHCRAFT BONANZA WAS APCHING TO LAND IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. WE EACH VEERED TO OUR RESPECTIVE R'S, MISSING BY 100-200 FT. AFTER CLBING AND LEVELING OFF, I SWITCHED TO 122.7 AND (SURE ENOUGH) THE BONANZA WAS SELF-ANNOUNCING ON THAT FREQ. AT MY SUGGESTION, HE SWITCHED TO 122.9. LATER, I HEARD OTHER TFC USING 122.9 FOR CTAF AT C59. ALSO, I SUSPECT THE BONANZA WAS FLYING A STRAIGHT-IN PRACTICE NDB APCH TO RWY 18. HE DID NOT FLY A STANDARD TFC PATTERN. THIS NEAR MISS WAS CAUSED BY: 1) CONFUSION AS TO THE APPROPRIATE CTAF FOR C59. 2) THE BONANZA PLT'S FAILURE TO FLY A STANDARD TFC PATTERN, CONTINUING HIS STRAIGHT-IN APCH INTO THE ATA. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) MAKE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CTAF FREQS COINCIDE WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE RELATED SECTIONALS. 2) OR, AS A WEAK SUBSTITUTE, ISSUE A NOTAM THAT REMAINS EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE NEXT SECTIONAL IS ISSUED, REFLECTING THE NEW CTAF. 3) CONTINUE EMPHASIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARD TFC PATTERNS.

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.