Narrative:

I flew into ZZZ and as I neared the airport I obtained wind information from the ASOS; which gave the wind as 120 degrees at 3 KTS. Flight guide; and local convention; define the 'calm wind' (under 6 KTS) runway as runway 32. I set up for a midfield downwind for runway 32. On downwind; I spotted another aircraft that appeared to be setting up for downwind approach to runway 14. I called on the CTAF to ascertain his intent and got no reply. I monitored his aircraft position and hoped he was going to fly crosswind for runway 32 and follow me. As I entered short final; I saw him turn base for runway 14 and had to break off my approach; offsetting to the right. He proceeded to do a touch-and-go; and still had made no radio calls. I went around and flew upwind; crosswind; downwind and base to final for runway 32 again and made a short approach to landing. As I was taxiing down the runway to the exit intersection; the other pilot once again made an approach to runway 14. He got within 300 ft or less of the runway before finally seeing my aircraft on the runway; and he performed a go around. He subsequently landed. I spoke with him and learned he was a student pilot of 16 yrs of age his instructor was inside the terminal during the student's flight. I asked if he heard me on the radio; or saw me in the pattern. He replied in the negative to both. He said maybe his radio didn't work. I asked if he knew runway 32 was the calm wind runway. He didn't seem to know this. At this point I departed the airport to return to my home field. I spoke with a FSDO specialist who agreed this was a potentially hazardous situation and that the student's instructor should have had him in a pattern favoring the calm wind runway. And although this convention (runway 32 being the calm wind runway) appears in flight guide; but not the AFD; it is still a well-known local convention; and in the interest of safety should be followed. I think sits such as this are quite common at non-controled airfields; and pilots should be aware that flying patterns that conflict with aircraft following local practice is potentially hazardous.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C172 PILOT REPORTS CONFLICT WITH SOLO STUDENT PILOT FLYING AN INCORRECT CTAF VFR PATTERN WITH HIS RADIO INOP; BUT INSTRUCTOR VISUALLY MONITORING.

Narrative: I FLEW INTO ZZZ AND AS I NEARED THE ARPT I OBTAINED WIND INFO FROM THE ASOS; WHICH GAVE THE WIND AS 120 DEGS AT 3 KTS. FLT GUIDE; AND LCL CONVENTION; DEFINE THE 'CALM WIND' (UNDER 6 KTS) RWY AS RWY 32. I SET UP FOR A MIDFIELD DOWNWIND FOR RWY 32. ON DOWNWIND; I SPOTTED ANOTHER ACFT THAT APPEARED TO BE SETTING UP FOR DOWNWIND APCH TO RWY 14. I CALLED ON THE CTAF TO ASCERTAIN HIS INTENT AND GOT NO REPLY. I MONITORED HIS ACFT POS AND HOPED HE WAS GOING TO FLY XWIND FOR RWY 32 AND FOLLOW ME. AS I ENTERED SHORT FINAL; I SAW HIM TURN BASE FOR RWY 14 AND HAD TO BREAK OFF MY APCH; OFFSETTING TO THE R. HE PROCEEDED TO DO A TOUCH-AND-GO; AND STILL HAD MADE NO RADIO CALLS. I WENT AROUND AND FLEW UPWIND; XWIND; DOWNWIND AND BASE TO FINAL FOR RWY 32 AGAIN AND MADE A SHORT APCH TO LNDG. AS I WAS TAXIING DOWN THE RWY TO THE EXIT INTXN; THE OTHER PLT ONCE AGAIN MADE AN APCH TO RWY 14. HE GOT WITHIN 300 FT OR LESS OF THE RWY BEFORE FINALLY SEEING MY ACFT ON THE RWY; AND HE PERFORMED A GAR. HE SUBSEQUENTLY LANDED. I SPOKE WITH HIM AND LEARNED HE WAS A STUDENT PLT OF 16 YRS OF AGE HIS INSTRUCTOR WAS INSIDE THE TERMINAL DURING THE STUDENT'S FLT. I ASKED IF HE HEARD ME ON THE RADIO; OR SAW ME IN THE PATTERN. HE REPLIED IN THE NEGATIVE TO BOTH. HE SAID MAYBE HIS RADIO DIDN'T WORK. I ASKED IF HE KNEW RWY 32 WAS THE CALM WIND RWY. HE DIDN'T SEEM TO KNOW THIS. AT THIS POINT I DEPARTED THE ARPT TO RETURN TO MY HOME FIELD. I SPOKE WITH A FSDO SPECIALIST WHO AGREED THIS WAS A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SIT AND THAT THE STUDENT'S INSTRUCTOR SHOULD HAVE HAD HIM IN A PATTERN FAVORING THE CALM WIND RWY. AND ALTHOUGH THIS CONVENTION (RWY 32 BEING THE CALM WIND RWY) APPEARS IN FLT GUIDE; BUT NOT THE AFD; IT IS STILL A WELL-KNOWN LCL CONVENTION; AND IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. I THINK SITS SUCH AS THIS ARE QUITE COMMON AT NON-CTLED AIRFIELDS; AND PLTS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT FLYING PATTERNS THAT CONFLICT WITH ACFT FOLLOWING LCL PRACTICE IS POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS.

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.