Narrative:

I was new to the area; and had not been actively flying in the past yr or so. I was flying with a CFI from fdk for a proficiency/chkout flight; and we had approached the airport from the northeast. We approached overhead at approximately 2500 ft MSL when the instructor pulled the throttle to simulate an engine failure. I was flying the aircraft; and the CFI was making radio calls on the CTAF. We had the radio turned down on the way to the airport; however; turned the volume up upon reaching the airport. There were approximately 5 aircraft; including ours; operating in the vicinity. After initiating the maneuver; the CFI announced that we were over the field; and would be making a simulated engine out. I descended and turned downwind; following another aircraft. The CFI communicated with that aircraft and they agreed to accommodate our maneuver. I turned the aircraft onto a base leg; and announced that I was doing so on the CTAF. Shortly after turning on the base leg; a low wing aircraft that appeared to be a PA28 on the ILS flew approximately 300 ft directly underneath us; crossing right to left. I asked the CFI if he noticed the airplane; and he replied that he had not. The aircraft that was landing was still on the runway; and the aircraft on the approach went missed. The CFI called the aircraft on approach and asked if it had seen our airplane; and they replied that they had not. This is the second time since I started flying that I have been involved with an aircraft at an uncontrolled airfield that was not using their radio to assist in avoiding traffic. While we were approaching the airfield with the radio volume turned down; at least 5; possibly more; mins would have passed from the time we turned the volume up to the time we were on base. The time from the FAF to the missed approach at 90 KIAS is 2 mins 48 seconds on the localizer 23; so that aircraft would have announced FAF inbound in the time that we had the volume up; however; I do not remember hearing the aircraft announce anything; and in my mind if you're flying a localizer/ILS and are within 2 NM of the airport and hear an aircraft call a base leg; it would be prudent to announce that there is a potential for conflict. The bottom line here is that the FAA's priorities are misplaced; as they're more concerned with runway incursions and violating people that taxi 5 ft over the hold short line and chasing down a 2000 pound airplane with an $18 million F16 or shining a red light at the pilot to let them know that the FAA will come after them to suspend their pilot certificate while congress tries to implement a way to fine these pilots for getting lost; or changing their transponder code before they land. The FAA claims to be concerned about safety; so why don't they actually make a program about using the radio at an uncontrolled airfield? Instead all they can do is write in the aim telling pilots not to say 'position and hold' or 'any traffic please advise.' this is not an isolated problem -- there are uncontrolled airports all over the country; and I think that pilots need to learn more about them than the fact that radio usage is optional. With traffic avoidance system making their way into small airplanes; more and more pilots are going to start trusting their 'tis' instead of their eyes and radio; which will only add to the problem. An airport traffic pattern is not the place to play marco polo with 'tis' -- nothing beats telling other pilots where you are; and asking where they are.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PILOT REPORTS CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER ACFT DURING APPROACH TO FDK USING CTAF FOR ADVISORIES.

Narrative: I WAS NEW TO THE AREA; AND HAD NOT BEEN ACTIVELY FLYING IN THE PAST YR OR SO. I WAS FLYING WITH A CFI FROM FDK FOR A PROFICIENCY/CHKOUT FLT; AND WE HAD APCHED THE ARPT FROM THE NE. WE APCHED OVERHEAD AT APPROX 2500 FT MSL WHEN THE INSTRUCTOR PULLED THE THROTTLE TO SIMULATE AN ENG FAILURE. I WAS FLYING THE ACFT; AND THE CFI WAS MAKING RADIO CALLS ON THE CTAF. WE HAD THE RADIO TURNED DOWN ON THE WAY TO THE ARPT; HOWEVER; TURNED THE VOLUME UP UPON REACHING THE ARPT. THERE WERE APPROX 5 ACFT; INCLUDING OURS; OPERATING IN THE VICINITY. AFTER INITIATING THE MANEUVER; THE CFI ANNOUNCED THAT WE WERE OVER THE FIELD; AND WOULD BE MAKING A SIMULATED ENG OUT. I DSNDED AND TURNED DOWNWIND; FOLLOWING ANOTHER ACFT. THE CFI COMMUNICATED WITH THAT ACFT AND THEY AGREED TO ACCOMMODATE OUR MANEUVER. I TURNED THE ACFT ONTO A BASE LEG; AND ANNOUNCED THAT I WAS DOING SO ON THE CTAF. SHORTLY AFTER TURNING ON THE BASE LEG; A LOW WING ACFT THAT APPEARED TO BE A PA28 ON THE ILS FLEW APPROX 300 FT DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH US; XING R TO L. I ASKED THE CFI IF HE NOTICED THE AIRPLANE; AND HE REPLIED THAT HE HAD NOT. THE ACFT THAT WAS LNDG WAS STILL ON THE RWY; AND THE ACFT ON THE APCH WENT MISSED. THE CFI CALLED THE ACFT ON APCH AND ASKED IF IT HAD SEEN OUR AIRPLANE; AND THEY REPLIED THAT THEY HAD NOT. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME SINCE I STARTED FLYING THAT I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH AN ACFT AT AN UNCTLED AIRFIELD THAT WAS NOT USING THEIR RADIO TO ASSIST IN AVOIDING TFC. WHILE WE WERE APCHING THE AIRFIELD WITH THE RADIO VOLUME TURNED DOWN; AT LEAST 5; POSSIBLY MORE; MINS WOULD HAVE PASSED FROM THE TIME WE TURNED THE VOLUME UP TO THE TIME WE WERE ON BASE. THE TIME FROM THE FAF TO THE MISSED APCH AT 90 KIAS IS 2 MINS 48 SECONDS ON THE LOC 23; SO THAT ACFT WOULD HAVE ANNOUNCED FAF INBOUND IN THE TIME THAT WE HAD THE VOLUME UP; HOWEVER; I DO NOT REMEMBER HEARING THE ACFT ANNOUNCE ANYTHING; AND IN MY MIND IF YOU'RE FLYING A LOC/ILS AND ARE WITHIN 2 NM OF THE ARPT AND HEAR AN ACFT CALL A BASE LEG; IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO ANNOUNCE THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT. THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THE FAA'S PRIORITIES ARE MISPLACED; AS THEY'RE MORE CONCERNED WITH RWY INCURSIONS AND VIOLATING PEOPLE THAT TAXI 5 FT OVER THE HOLD SHORT LINE AND CHASING DOWN A 2000 LB AIRPLANE WITH AN $18 MILLION F16 OR SHINING A RED LIGHT AT THE PLT TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THE FAA WILL COME AFTER THEM TO SUSPEND THEIR PLT CERTIFICATE WHILE CONGRESS TRIES TO IMPLEMENT A WAY TO FINE THESE PLTS FOR GETTING LOST; OR CHANGING THEIR XPONDER CODE BEFORE THEY LAND. THE FAA CLAIMS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY; SO WHY DON'T THEY ACTUALLY MAKE A PROGRAM ABOUT USING THE RADIO AT AN UNCTLED AIRFIELD? INSTEAD ALL THEY CAN DO IS WRITE IN THE AIM TELLING PLTS NOT TO SAY 'POS AND HOLD' OR 'ANY TFC PLEASE ADVISE.' THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED PROB -- THERE ARE UNCTLED ARPTS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY; AND I THINK THAT PLTS NEED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THEM THAN THE FACT THAT RADIO USAGE IS OPTIONAL. WITH TFC AVOIDANCE SYS MAKING THEIR WAY INTO SMALL AIRPLANES; MORE AND MORE PLTS ARE GOING TO START TRUSTING THEIR 'TIS' INSTEAD OF THEIR EYES AND RADIO; WHICH WILL ONLY ADD TO THE PROB. AN ARPT TFC PATTERN IS NOT THE PLACE TO PLAY MARCO POLO WITH 'TIS' -- NOTHING BEATS TELLING OTHER PLTS WHERE YOU ARE; AND ASKING WHERE THEY ARE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.