Narrative:

Oct/mon/02 IFR flight plan to hio. Approximately XA00 local time, arriving at airport boundary, handed off by center to tower. Tower advised to continue for the visual approach to runway 30, call on right downwind. Next call to tower on downwind to runway 30 and tower advised to report abeam the tower. We advised by tower. Tower confirmed position and then cleared us to land runway 30 behind a piper seminole on final. Spaced out downwind and started base turn to follow final traffic. Tower asked if we had final traffic in sight at which time we acknowledged no. Tower advised to continue downwind and advised seminole traffic was on 2 mi final. Copilot and myself were looking for inbound traffic, at which time the seminole called out a 3 mi final. Kept looking for that traffic and asked tower to call my base turn. Tower advised go ahead and start base,. Asked copilot to call my final turn while still looking for the piper seminole traffic in front of us. I looked out right window to align to final and then took a final scan to my left and caught sight of an aircraft at 9 O'clock to 10 O'clock position less than 200-300 ft horizontal and 25-50 ft vertical from us. Aircraft crossed overhead and took up position above and behind us aligning with final approach to same runway. Tower called and asked position of said aircraft a cirrus design, and he advised tower that he was on final for runway 30. Tower cleared him to land runway 30 and asked him if he had the conquest in sight. He called back that he didn't. Tower called us and said that he would have to re-sequence us to land runway 30, at which time the cirrus called and said that he had the conquest (us) below and in front and would do a right 360 degree turn for spacing. He couldn't see us previously, because we were below his nose. We could see him. I refrained from getting upset at the tower and didn't want to confuse a very difficult situation. After landing we were told to contact ground and taxied in without any comments by the tower. I called the tower by landline and asked what had happened. I complained that they had not told me about converging traffic on an opposite base leg to final. I stated that it was an near midair collision. The tower personnel said that the other aircraft was told to follow us in, but had been too fast in the pattern and didn't follow instructions. They also stated that it was VFR conditions, meaning that it was see and avoid. Such as I should have seen the other aircraft. I stated that it is controled airspace. They said that the other aircraft was told to call them when he landed and they would sort out what he was thinking and what had happened. I asked that they call me when that conversation had taken place. I received a phone call from hio tower manager the next day. He apologized for the situation and for his tower personnel. He said he listened to the tapes and that it was a combination of errors of which they had told _____ to follow the seminole by mistake thinking he had told him to follow the conquest. He also stated that the other aircraft had made steep turns and was fast in the pattern. He had called out further than he was, thus causing further confusion to the controller. Also, the controller had just returned from 3 days sick leave, plus it was hazy and difficult to see in our approaching area. My question and only thought about this situation is why the controller failed to inform us that another aircraft on left base would be converging and following us. If this had taken place, I would have made that area a more important part of my scan and would have quizzed the controller on his position if I had not seen him while still in my base turn. This is the second type of situation I encountered at hio airport in the past several months. I spoke to another tower controller about protocol with regard to information in the pattern, and they said it is not required to inform leading aircraft of following aircraft position. After this near midair collision, I believe it would be most helpful to give all pilots information that might be used to protect themselves with. To conclude: I think proper information and TCASII would have helped us in this type of situation. Obviously the controller is only human and can and will make mistakes.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C425 CREW HAD LESS THAN LEGAL SEPARATION IN THE PATTERN IN HIO CLASS D.

Narrative: OCT/MON/02 IFR FLT PLAN TO HIO. APPROX XA00 LCL TIME, ARRIVING AT ARPT BOUNDARY, HANDED OFF BY CTR TO TWR. TWR ADVISED TO CONTINUE FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 30, CALL ON R DOWNWIND. NEXT CALL TO TWR ON DOWNWIND TO RWY 30 AND TWR ADVISED TO RPT ABEAM THE TWR. WE ADVISED BY TWR. TWR CONFIRMED POS AND THEN CLRED US TO LAND RWY 30 BEHIND A PIPER SEMINOLE ON FINAL. SPACED OUT DOWNWIND AND STARTED BASE TURN TO FOLLOW FINAL TFC. TWR ASKED IF WE HAD FINAL TFC IN SIGHT AT WHICH TIME WE ACKNOWLEDGED NO. TWR ADVISED TO CONTINUE DOWNWIND AND ADVISED SEMINOLE TFC WAS ON 2 MI FINAL. COPLT AND MYSELF WERE LOOKING FOR INBOUND TFC, AT WHICH TIME THE SEMINOLE CALLED OUT A 3 MI FINAL. KEPT LOOKING FOR THAT TFC AND ASKED TWR TO CALL MY BASE TURN. TWR ADVISED GO AHEAD AND START BASE,. ASKED COPLT TO CALL MY FINAL TURN WHILE STILL LOOKING FOR THE PIPER SEMINOLE TFC IN FRONT OF US. I LOOKED OUT R WINDOW TO ALIGN TO FINAL AND THEN TOOK A FINAL SCAN TO MY L AND CAUGHT SIGHT OF AN ACFT AT 9 O'CLOCK TO 10 O'CLOCK POS LESS THAN 200-300 FT HORIZ AND 25-50 FT VERT FROM US. ACFT CROSSED OVERHEAD AND TOOK UP POS ABOVE AND BEHIND US ALIGNING WITH FINAL APCH TO SAME RWY. TWR CALLED AND ASKED POS OF SAID ACFT A CIRRUS DESIGN, AND HE ADVISED TWR THAT HE WAS ON FINAL FOR RWY 30. TWR CLRED HIM TO LAND RWY 30 AND ASKED HIM IF HE HAD THE CONQUEST IN SIGHT. HE CALLED BACK THAT HE DIDN'T. TWR CALLED US AND SAID THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO RE-SEQUENCE US TO LAND RWY 30, AT WHICH TIME THE CIRRUS CALLED AND SAID THAT HE HAD THE CONQUEST (US) BELOW AND IN FRONT AND WOULD DO A R 360 DEG TURN FOR SPACING. HE COULDN'T SEE US PREVIOUSLY, BECAUSE WE WERE BELOW HIS NOSE. WE COULD SEE HIM. I REFRAINED FROM GETTING UPSET AT THE TWR AND DIDN'T WANT TO CONFUSE A VERY DIFFICULT SIT. AFTER LNDG WE WERE TOLD TO CONTACT GND AND TAXIED IN WITHOUT ANY COMMENTS BY THE TWR. I CALLED THE TWR BY LANDLINE AND ASKED WHAT HAD HAPPENED. I COMPLAINED THAT THEY HAD NOT TOLD ME ABOUT CONVERGING TFC ON AN OPPOSITE BASE LEG TO FINAL. I STATED THAT IT WAS AN NMAC. THE TWR PERSONNEL SAID THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS TOLD TO FOLLOW US IN, BUT HAD BEEN TOO FAST IN THE PATTERN AND DIDN'T FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS. THEY ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS VFR CONDITIONS, MEANING THAT IT WAS SEE AND AVOID. SUCH AS I SHOULD HAVE SEEN THE OTHER ACFT. I STATED THAT IT IS CTLED AIRSPACE. THEY SAID THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS TOLD TO CALL THEM WHEN HE LANDED AND THEY WOULD SORT OUT WHAT HE WAS THINKING AND WHAT HAD HAPPENED. I ASKED THAT THEY CALL ME WHEN THAT CONVERSATION HAD TAKEN PLACE. I RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM HIO TWR MGR THE NEXT DAY. HE APOLOGIZED FOR THE SIT AND FOR HIS TWR PERSONNEL. HE SAID HE LISTENED TO THE TAPES AND THAT IT WAS A COMBINATION OF ERRORS OF WHICH THEY HAD TOLD _____ TO FOLLOW THE SEMINOLE BY MISTAKE THINKING HE HAD TOLD HIM TO FOLLOW THE CONQUEST. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE OTHER ACFT HAD MADE STEEP TURNS AND WAS FAST IN THE PATTERN. HE HAD CALLED OUT FURTHER THAN HE WAS, THUS CAUSING FURTHER CONFUSION TO THE CTLR. ALSO, THE CTLR HAD JUST RETURNED FROM 3 DAYS SICK LEAVE, PLUS IT WAS HAZY AND DIFFICULT TO SEE IN OUR APCHING AREA. MY QUESTION AND ONLY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS SIT IS WHY THE CTLR FAILED TO INFORM US THAT ANOTHER ACFT ON L BASE WOULD BE CONVERGING AND FOLLOWING US. IF THIS HAD TAKEN PLACE, I WOULD HAVE MADE THAT AREA A MORE IMPORTANT PART OF MY SCAN AND WOULD HAVE QUIZZED THE CTLR ON HIS POS IF I HAD NOT SEEN HIM WHILE STILL IN MY BASE TURN. THIS IS THE SECOND TYPE OF SIT I ENCOUNTERED AT HIO ARPT IN THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS. I SPOKE TO ANOTHER TWR CTLR ABOUT PROTOCOL WITH REGARD TO INFO IN THE PATTERN, AND THEY SAID IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO INFORM LEADING ACFT OF FOLLOWING ACFT POS. AFTER THIS NMAC, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE MOST HELPFUL TO GIVE ALL PLTS INFO THAT MIGHT BE USED TO PROTECT THEMSELVES WITH. TO CONCLUDE: I THINK PROPER INFO AND TCASII WOULD HAVE HELPED US IN THIS TYPE OF SIT. OBVIOUSLY THE CTLR IS ONLY HUMAN AND CAN AND WILL MAKE MISTAKES.

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.