Narrative:

During a glider flight; area developed into -TRSA. Returned to vicinity of 1i5 airport and made a normal 45 degree entry to the right midfield downwind for runway 12. Reported joining the 1/2 mi 45 leg on CTAF 122.85. Maintained listening watch on 122.85 during entire 20 min flight; no transient traffic heard. During my base to final turn; a comanche was observed to be over the departure end of runway 12; wbound; climbing through 50 ft AGL. To avoid other traffic; I continued the right turn and steered the glider well south of the landing area. Once the other aircraft had passed; I made a diagonal approach and normal landing to the 100 ft wide grass runway surface south of the paved runway 12/30. The comanche pilot returned to the airport and landed. He indicated that he had made a straight-in approach to runway 30; and had made 3 mi final and 1 mi final calls on 122.80 (which was the CTAF at this airport several yrs ago). Pilot indicated he had been on an IFR flight plan; and had canceled IFR in order to land at 1i5. 1i5 does not have an instrument approach procedure. When asked the date of his sectional chart; the comanche pilot indicated that he had IFR en route charts. 1i5 does not appear on govt en route charts. Surface winds were approximately 130 degrees at 10 KTS gusting to 15 KTS. The comanche pilot indicated that he had recently received his instrument rating. He said he was concerned about the -TRSA 5 mi southeast of the field; and wanted to beat the storm to the airport. Perhaps the extensive hood time and straight in approaches characteristic of instrument training eroded the comanche pilot's VFR; uncontrolled airport skill set. In view of the erroneous frequency; the comanche pilot did not have all available information concerning his flight. Further; the weather was 3000-5000 broken to overcast with embedded thunderstorms. Given the pilot's equipment and lack of experience flying IFR; these conditions were likely in excess of his capabilities. This environmental stress possibly distracted the pilot from following established procedures and from exercising his responsibility to see and avoid all other traffic and to yield the right of way to glider traffic. Note: due to miscommunication with the FAA; the CTAF for 1i5 has been changed again from 122.85 to 122.90. Frequent changes to CTAF frequencies are adverse to flight safety.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SAILPLANE PLT HAS CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH PA24 ON APCH TO 1I5.

Narrative: DURING A GLIDER FLT; AREA DEVELOPED INTO -TRSA. RETURNED TO VICINITY OF 1I5 ARPT AND MADE A NORMAL 45 DEG ENTRY TO THE R MIDFIELD DOWNWIND FOR RWY 12. RPTED JOINING THE 1/2 MI 45 LEG ON CTAF 122.85. MAINTAINED LISTENING WATCH ON 122.85 DURING ENTIRE 20 MIN FLT; NO TRANSIENT TFC HEARD. DURING MY BASE TO FINAL TURN; A COMANCHE WAS OBSERVED TO BE OVER THE DEP END OF RWY 12; WBOUND; CLBING THROUGH 50 FT AGL. TO AVOID OTHER TFC; I CONTINUED THE R TURN AND STEERED THE GLIDER WELL S OF THE LNDG AREA. ONCE THE OTHER ACFT HAD PASSED; I MADE A DIAGONAL APCH AND NORMAL LNDG TO THE 100 FT WIDE GRASS RWY SURFACE S OF THE PAVED RWY 12/30. THE COMANCHE PLT RETURNED TO THE ARPT AND LANDED. HE INDICATED THAT HE HAD MADE A STRAIGHT-IN APCH TO RWY 30; AND HAD MADE 3 MI FINAL AND 1 MI FINAL CALLS ON 122.80 (WHICH WAS THE CTAF AT THIS ARPT SEVERAL YRS AGO). PLT INDICATED HE HAD BEEN ON AN IFR FLT PLAN; AND HAD CANCELED IFR IN ORDER TO LAND AT 1I5. 1I5 DOES NOT HAVE AN INST APCH PROC. WHEN ASKED THE DATE OF HIS SECTIONAL CHART; THE COMANCHE PLT INDICATED THAT HE HAD IFR ENRTE CHARTS. 1I5 DOES NOT APPEAR ON GOVT ENRTE CHARTS. SURFACE WINDS WERE APPROX 130 DEGS AT 10 KTS GUSTING TO 15 KTS. THE COMANCHE PLT INDICATED THAT HE HAD RECENTLY RECEIVED HIS INST RATING. HE SAID HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE -TRSA 5 MI SE OF THE FIELD; AND WANTED TO BEAT THE STORM TO THE ARPT. PERHAPS THE EXTENSIVE HOOD TIME AND STRAIGHT IN APPROACHES CHARACTERISTIC OF INSTRUMENT TRAINING ERODED THE COMANCHE PILOT'S VFR; UNCONTROLLED AIRPORT SKILL SET. IN VIEW OF THE ERRONEOUS FREQUENCY; THE COMANCHE PILOT DID NOT HAVE ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION CONCERNING HIS FLIGHT. FURTHER; THE WEATHER WAS 3000-5000 BROKEN TO OVERCAST WITH EMBEDDED THUNDERSTORMS. GIVEN THE PILOT'S EQUIPMENT AND LACK OF EXPERIENCE FLYING IFR; THESE CONDITIONS WERE LIKELY IN EXCESS OF HIS CAPABILITIES. THIS ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS POSSIBLY DISTRACTED THE PILOT FROM FOLLOWING ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES AND FROM EXERCISING HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE AND AVOID ALL OTHER TRAFFIC AND TO YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY TO GLIDER TRAFFIC. NOTE: DUE TO MISCOMMUNICATION WITH THE FAA; THE CTAF FOR 1I5 HAS BEEN CHANGED AGAIN FROM 122.85 TO 122.90. FREQUENT CHANGES TO CTAF FREQUENCIES ARE ADVERSE TO FLIGHT SAFETY.

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.