Narrative:

I tuned in the ASOS and received field information with winds favoring runway 30. When approximately 9 mi to the west with runway 12/30 in view, I announced my intentions over CTAF-unicom frequency for a touch-and-go on runway 30 using left traffic and requested any other traffic in the area to please advise. I received no reply and had heard no traffic on that frequency during the entire trip. I descended to pattern altitude (5800 ft) and as I came abeam the runway 12 numbers, I called left downwind for a touch-and-go on runway 30. At that time I observed no aircraft on the entire runway and no aircraft moving or about to enter the runway. On beginning the left turn to base for runway 30, I again announced my position and intentions for a touch-and-go. During that turn, the lowered left wing blocked my view of runway 30. As I rolled out of the turn to base, I noticed several large birds in the distance which appeared to be heading in the direction of what would be my path to final. As I rolled onto final for runway 30, I again called my position and intentions. At that time I was still concerned about running into the birds which were now about to cross my flight path. I slowed my descent somewhat until it appeared they would cross below me. At that time I increased my descent and immediately switched my attention back to the threshold for runway 30 wanting to land close to the numbers to allow ample runway for the touch-and-go. I flared, felt the main wheels touch, and as the nosewheel came down, I raised the flaps and pushed the throttle forward. As I looked up the runway, I saw a twin engine, low wing aircraft facing me about 1/2 way or less down the 4100 ft runway. The aircraft appeared to be either stopped or moving slowly in my direction and was pulled far to its right. I did not feel with my speed (touch-and-go) that I would be able to stop prior to reaching that aircraft's position and that attempting to do so might cause a loss of directional control leading to a collision or departure from the runway. I steered gently to my right and continued the takeoff, lifting off about the time I reached the other aircraft's position. As I was climbing after just passing the other aircraft's position, I heard the pilot on the CTAF frequency say something like, 'boy, that's the closest I've ever come to a head-on.' I called back and asked if he had not heard my inbound call and intentions as well as my position and intention reports for downwind, base and final. He stated that he had not. He stated that he had called a back taxi for runway 30 which I never heard. From these conversations, it is clear that we were both on the same CTAF. Why the xmissions were not heard is unknown. From this experience, it is obvious that radio calls on CTAF are clearly not sufficient in and of themselves to avoid the potential for a collision in the vicinity of airport traffic patterns and runways even if both aircraft have radio communication capability. On my part, although I had 'cleared' the runway on downwind and made proper announcements, I became distraction by the potential collision with birds and then concentrated on the runway 30 threshold without visually reclring the entire runway. What distraction the pilot of the other aircraft may have encountered in not hearing the numerous radio calls of position and intent or observing an aircraft in the pattern is unknown. In any case, the importance of looking and seeing rather than depending solely on technology has once again been verified.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PLT LANDS ON OCCUPIED RWY AT A NON TWRED ARPT.

Narrative: I TUNED IN THE ASOS AND RECEIVED FIELD INFO WITH WINDS FAVORING RWY 30. WHEN APPROX 9 MI TO THE W WITH RWY 12/30 IN VIEW, I ANNOUNCED MY INTENTIONS OVER CTAF-UNICOM FREQ FOR A TOUCH-AND-GO ON RWY 30 USING L TFC AND REQUESTED ANY OTHER TFC IN THE AREA TO PLEASE ADVISE. I RECEIVED NO REPLY AND HAD HEARD NO TFC ON THAT FREQ DURING THE ENTIRE TRIP. I DSNDED TO PATTERN ALT (5800 FT) AND AS I CAME ABEAM THE RWY 12 NUMBERS, I CALLED L DOWNWIND FOR A TOUCH-AND-GO ON RWY 30. AT THAT TIME I OBSERVED NO ACFT ON THE ENTIRE RWY AND NO ACFT MOVING OR ABOUT TO ENTER THE RWY. ON BEGINNING THE L TURN TO BASE FOR RWY 30, I AGAIN ANNOUNCED MY POS AND INTENTIONS FOR A TOUCH-AND-GO. DURING THAT TURN, THE LOWERED L WING BLOCKED MY VIEW OF RWY 30. AS I ROLLED OUT OF THE TURN TO BASE, I NOTICED SEVERAL LARGE BIRDS IN THE DISTANCE WHICH APPEARED TO BE HEADING IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT WOULD BE MY PATH TO FINAL. AS I ROLLED ONTO FINAL FOR RWY 30, I AGAIN CALLED MY POS AND INTENTIONS. AT THAT TIME I WAS STILL CONCERNED ABOUT RUNNING INTO THE BIRDS WHICH WERE NOW ABOUT TO CROSS MY FLT PATH. I SLOWED MY DSCNT SOMEWHAT UNTIL IT APPEARED THEY WOULD CROSS BELOW ME. AT THAT TIME I INCREASED MY DSCNT AND IMMEDIATELY SWITCHED MY ATTN BACK TO THE THRESHOLD FOR RWY 30 WANTING TO LAND CLOSE TO THE NUMBERS TO ALLOW AMPLE RWY FOR THE TOUCH-AND-GO. I FLARED, FELT THE MAIN WHEELS TOUCH, AND AS THE NOSEWHEEL CAME DOWN, I RAISED THE FLAPS AND PUSHED THE THROTTLE FORWARD. AS I LOOKED UP THE RWY, I SAW A TWIN ENG, LOW WING ACFT FACING ME ABOUT 1/2 WAY OR LESS DOWN THE 4100 FT RWY. THE ACFT APPEARED TO BE EITHER STOPPED OR MOVING SLOWLY IN MY DIRECTION AND WAS PULLED FAR TO ITS R. I DID NOT FEEL WITH MY SPD (TOUCH-AND-GO) THAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO STOP PRIOR TO REACHING THAT ACFT'S POS AND THAT ATTEMPTING TO DO SO MIGHT CAUSE A LOSS OF DIRECTIONAL CTL LEADING TO A COLLISION OR DEP FROM THE RWY. I STEERED GENTLY TO MY R AND CONTINUED THE TKOF, LIFTING OFF ABOUT THE TIME I REACHED THE OTHER ACFT'S POS. AS I WAS CLBING AFTER JUST PASSING THE OTHER ACFT'S POS, I HEARD THE PLT ON THE CTAF FREQ SAY SOMETHING LIKE, 'BOY, THAT'S THE CLOSEST I'VE EVER COME TO A HEAD-ON.' I CALLED BACK AND ASKED IF HE HAD NOT HEARD MY INBOUND CALL AND INTENTIONS AS WELL AS MY POS AND INTENTION RPTS FOR DOWNWIND, BASE AND FINAL. HE STATED THAT HE HAD NOT. HE STATED THAT HE HAD CALLED A BACK TAXI FOR RWY 30 WHICH I NEVER HEARD. FROM THESE CONVERSATIONS, IT IS CLR THAT WE WERE BOTH ON THE SAME CTAF. WHY THE XMISSIONS WERE NOT HEARD IS UNKNOWN. FROM THIS EXPERIENCE, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT RADIO CALLS ON CTAF ARE CLRLY NOT SUFFICIENT IN AND OF THEMSELVES TO AVOID THE POTENTIAL FOR A COLLISION IN THE VICINITY OF ARPT TFC PATTERNS AND RWYS EVEN IF BOTH ACFT HAVE RADIO COM CAPABILITY. ON MY PART, ALTHOUGH I HAD 'CLRED' THE RWY ON DOWNWIND AND MADE PROPER ANNOUNCEMENTS, I BECAME DISTR BY THE POTENTIAL COLLISION WITH BIRDS AND THEN CONCENTRATED ON THE RWY 30 THRESHOLD WITHOUT VISUALLY RECLRING THE ENTIRE RWY. WHAT DISTR THE PLT OF THE OTHER ACFT MAY HAVE ENCOUNTERED IN NOT HEARING THE NUMEROUS RADIO CALLS OF POS AND INTENT OR OBSERVING AN ACFT IN THE PATTERN IS UNKNOWN. IN ANY CASE, THE IMPORTANCE OF LOOKING AND SEEING RATHER THAN DEPENDING SOLELY ON TECHNOLOGY HAS ONCE AGAIN BEEN VERIFIED.

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.