Narrative:

On an IFR flight sbound from bangor, me, to owd in VFR conditions, I requested a localizer runway 35 circle to land runway 17 approach with the intention of getting a visual perspective of my home base from a circle to land altitude of 600 ft while in VFR conditions, to aide me should the circle to land need to happen in IFR conditions. I expected to circle to the right (east) over an unpopulated area. My request for the approach added about 15 mins of vectoring to the flight. I was xferred to norwood tower outside the marker (stoge) and called in, then called marker inbound. I was advised by norwood tower to break off the approach 3 mi from the airport and transition to a left (west) downwind. This was disappointing as it would negate the desired lesson. I determined to only let down to 1000 ft and then break off the approach and comply. The tower did not advise me of any conflict, and while tower had communications with another aircraft, my call sign was not used and I was focused on flying the approach precisely. I had been flying for 6 hours that day, and that may have contributed to my not paying attention to the tower transmission to the other aircraft, which apparently was clearance to take off. When I reached 1000 ft, at what I believed was about 3 mi out, I looked up and saw a landing light lifting off from runway 17 in my direction, headed for my position. I was surprised a departure was coming my way, and was more surprised when the departure turned about 20 degrees west, the direction tower had told me to turn to break off the approach. It was dusk, I had already had my strobes and landing light switched on, and I determined to go into a 'see and avoid' mode rather than follow the tower instructions and allow a converging conflict situation to occur. I descended 200 ft to allow more spacing and continued in toward the runway 35 until the other aircraft cleared to my left. The tower controller strongly, and repeatedly, admonished me for not following instructions. I did not think it would be productive to explain my actions on the radio, and transitioned west to make right traffic about 1 mi prior to the airport and landed. I believe the situation could have been avoided if better communications had taken place, specifically if tower had advised my call sign that the transition was to avoid departing oncoming traffic, or if the departure had been delayed for about a min while I was allowed to conduct the approach as requested. The educational value of the approach was negated, and an unsafe condition was permitted to occur with 2 aircraft converging at several hundred KTS.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE36 ON LOC RWY 35 APCH TO OWD INITIATES ATC APPROVED CIRCLE TO RWY 17 AND EXPERIENCED CONFLICT WITH RWY 17 DEP.

Narrative: ON AN IFR FLT SBOUND FROM BANGOR, ME, TO OWD IN VFR CONDITIONS, I REQUESTED A LOC RWY 35 CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 17 APCH WITH THE INTENTION OF GETTING A VISUAL PERSPECTIVE OF MY HOME BASE FROM A CIRCLE TO LAND ALT OF 600 FT WHILE IN VFR CONDITIONS, TO AIDE ME SHOULD THE CIRCLE TO LAND NEED TO HAPPEN IN IFR CONDITIONS. I EXPECTED TO CIRCLE TO THE R (E) OVER AN UNPOPULATED AREA. MY REQUEST FOR THE APCH ADDED ABOUT 15 MINS OF VECTORING TO THE FLT. I WAS XFERRED TO NORWOOD TWR OUTSIDE THE MARKER (STOGE) AND CALLED IN, THEN CALLED MARKER INBOUND. I WAS ADVISED BY NORWOOD TWR TO BREAK OFF THE APCH 3 MI FROM THE ARPT AND TRANSITION TO A L (W) DOWNWIND. THIS WAS DISAPPOINTING AS IT WOULD NEGATE THE DESIRED LESSON. I DETERMINED TO ONLY LET DOWN TO 1000 FT AND THEN BREAK OFF THE APCH AND COMPLY. THE TWR DID NOT ADVISE ME OF ANY CONFLICT, AND WHILE TWR HAD COMS WITH ANOTHER ACFT, MY CALL SIGN WAS NOT USED AND I WAS FOCUSED ON FLYING THE APCH PRECISELY. I HAD BEEN FLYING FOR 6 HRS THAT DAY, AND THAT MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO MY NOT PAYING ATTN TO THE TWR XMISSION TO THE OTHER ACFT, WHICH APPARENTLY WAS CLRNC TO TAKE OFF. WHEN I REACHED 1000 FT, AT WHAT I BELIEVED WAS ABOUT 3 MI OUT, I LOOKED UP AND SAW A LNDG LIGHT LIFTING OFF FROM RWY 17 IN MY DIRECTION, HEADED FOR MY POS. I WAS SURPRISED A DEP WAS COMING MY WAY, AND WAS MORE SURPRISED WHEN THE DEP TURNED ABOUT 20 DEGS W, THE DIRECTION TWR HAD TOLD ME TO TURN TO BREAK OFF THE APCH. IT WAS DUSK, I HAD ALREADY HAD MY STROBES AND LNDG LIGHT SWITCHED ON, AND I DETERMINED TO GO INTO A 'SEE AND AVOID' MODE RATHER THAN FOLLOW THE TWR INSTRUCTIONS AND ALLOW A CONVERGING CONFLICT SIT TO OCCUR. I DSNDED 200 FT TO ALLOW MORE SPACING AND CONTINUED IN TOWARD THE RWY 35 UNTIL THE OTHER ACFT CLRED TO MY L. THE TWR CTLR STRONGLY, AND REPEATEDLY, ADMONISHED ME FOR NOT FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS. I DID NOT THINK IT WOULD BE PRODUCTIVE TO EXPLAIN MY ACTIONS ON THE RADIO, AND TRANSITIONED W TO MAKE R TFC ABOUT 1 MI PRIOR TO THE ARPT AND LANDED. I BELIEVE THE SIT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF BETTER COMS HAD TAKEN PLACE, SPECIFICALLY IF TWR HAD ADVISED MY CALL SIGN THAT THE TRANSITION WAS TO AVOID DEPARTING ONCOMING TFC, OR IF THE DEP HAD BEEN DELAYED FOR ABOUT A MIN WHILE I WAS ALLOWED TO CONDUCT THE APCH AS REQUESTED. THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF THE APCH WAS NEGATED, AND AN UNSAFE CONDITION WAS PERMITTED TO OCCUR WITH 2 ACFT CONVERGING AT SEVERAL HUNDRED KTS.

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.