Narrative:

I am uncertain of the chain of events. I have heard through acquaintances that an near midair collision report was requested over the sns tower frequency. A bonanza apparently had an near midair collision with a pitts southeast of salinas airport. The color of the pitts is similar to the one I was flying and at least one other pitts that was in operation that afternoon. I did not see any other bonanza during my flight and the timing of the report, as described to me, indicate that I was not involved in the event. I am sure that another pitts operating in the area near the same time was also unaware of an near midair collision. Contributing factors: on my flts that afternoon, I went to an area near the city of gonzales where there is commonly airplanes practicing aerobatics. This was not a normal location for me to practice. After a very few maneuvers, I flew southeast to another practice area that would allow for completely clear skies instead of scattered at 3800 ft, and I completed my practice in this area. I saw very few other airplanes during the flight and none of them bonanzas or at all close to me. Because of the timing of the event as described to me, I believe it would have occurred after my flight. Human performance: I flew in 2 practice areas that day. The first practice area is a location commonly used as on aerobatic practice area. I have very infrequently used this area as a practice area before. After looking at the sectional for the area, I am unsure if it is far away enough from an airway. I was actually unaware that an airway was in the vicinity until after being told of this event. It was not good judgement or decision making to not ensure that the practice area was an appropriate one. The second location is at a wavered aerobatic box. I have also learned that the box may require me to ensure that it is 'activated' on a day-by-day basis. This is a requirement that I was unaware of and I may not have taken the proper action with respect to the activation of the box. Corrective actions: from what I know about this event, I do not think that I was involved, but there are corrective actions that can be taken from my assessment of my flight: 1) the aerobatic box that is used should be ensured to be activated before use. 2) aerobatic practice outside of a wavered box must be verified to be appropriate instead of assuming that others using the area implies that it is appropriate. 3) I will be even more diligent in the continual scanning for other traffic during all flts, whether they be aerobatic or point-to-point.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PTS2 PLT CLAIMS HE WAS NOT THE PTS ACFT INVOLVED IN AN NMAC WITH A BE35 SE OF SNS ARPT.

Narrative: I AM UNCERTAIN OF THE CHAIN OF EVENTS. I HAVE HEARD THROUGH ACQUAINTANCES THAT AN NMAC RPT WAS REQUESTED OVER THE SNS TWR FREQ. A BONANZA APPARENTLY HAD AN NMAC WITH A PITTS SE OF SALINAS ARPT. THE COLOR OF THE PITTS IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE I WAS FLYING AND AT LEAST ONE OTHER PITTS THAT WAS IN OP THAT AFTERNOON. I DID NOT SEE ANY OTHER BONANZA DURING MY FLT AND THE TIMING OF THE RPT, AS DESCRIBED TO ME, INDICATE THAT I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE EVENT. I AM SURE THAT ANOTHER PITTS OPERATING IN THE AREA NEAR THE SAME TIME WAS ALSO UNAWARE OF AN NMAC. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: ON MY FLTS THAT AFTERNOON, I WENT TO AN AREA NEAR THE CITY OF GONZALES WHERE THERE IS COMMONLY AIRPLANES PRACTICING AEROBATICS. THIS WAS NOT A NORMAL LOCATION FOR ME TO PRACTICE. AFTER A VERY FEW MANEUVERS, I FLEW SE TO ANOTHER PRACTICE AREA THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR COMPLETELY CLR SKIES INSTEAD OF SCATTERED AT 3800 FT, AND I COMPLETED MY PRACTICE IN THIS AREA. I SAW VERY FEW OTHER AIRPLANES DURING THE FLT AND NONE OF THEM BONANZAS OR AT ALL CLOSE TO ME. BECAUSE OF THE TIMING OF THE EVENT AS DESCRIBED TO ME, I BELIEVE IT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED AFTER MY FLT. HUMAN PERFORMANCE: I FLEW IN 2 PRACTICE AREAS THAT DAY. THE FIRST PRACTICE AREA IS A LOCATION COMMONLY USED AS ON AEROBATIC PRACTICE AREA. I HAVE VERY INFREQUENTLY USED THIS AREA AS A PRACTICE AREA BEFORE. AFTER LOOKING AT THE SECTIONAL FOR THE AREA, I AM UNSURE IF IT IS FAR AWAY ENOUGH FROM AN AIRWAY. I WAS ACTUALLY UNAWARE THAT AN AIRWAY WAS IN THE VICINITY UNTIL AFTER BEING TOLD OF THIS EVENT. IT WAS NOT GOOD JUDGEMENT OR DECISION MAKING TO NOT ENSURE THAT THE PRACTICE AREA WAS AN APPROPRIATE ONE. THE SECOND LOCATION IS AT A WAVERED AEROBATIC BOX. I HAVE ALSO LEARNED THAT THE BOX MAY REQUIRE ME TO ENSURE THAT IT IS 'ACTIVATED' ON A DAY-BY-DAY BASIS. THIS IS A REQUIREMENT THAT I WAS UNAWARE OF AND I MAY NOT HAVE TAKEN THE PROPER ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE ACTIVATION OF THE BOX. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: FROM WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THIS EVENT, I DO NOT THINK THAT I WAS INVOLVED, BUT THERE ARE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS THAT CAN BE TAKEN FROM MY ASSESSMENT OF MY FLT: 1) THE AEROBATIC BOX THAT IS USED SHOULD BE ENSURED TO BE ACTIVATED BEFORE USE. 2) AEROBATIC PRACTICE OUTSIDE OF A WAVERED BOX MUST BE VERIFIED TO BE APPROPRIATE INSTEAD OF ASSUMING THAT OTHERS USING THE AREA IMPLIES THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE. 3) I WILL BE EVEN MORE DILIGENT IN THE CONTINUAL SCANNING FOR OTHER TFC DURING ALL FLTS, WHETHER THEY BE AEROBATIC OR POINT-TO-POINT.

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.