Narrative:

Cirrus was on practice VOR 33 approach vicinity procedure turn. As ZAB had IFR inbound; I passed traffic on cirrus and requested beacon code. Given XXXX. Aircraft acknowledged; ZAB passed citation and requested to pass over airport from fti visual approach to enter left downwind to runway 2 for descent purposes; which I approved. I had advised cirrus to expect citation traffic from fti earlier. Then advised cirrus that citation would overfly airport to west side left downwind. When citation came up on frequency he advised he was on right downwind to runway 2. I advised and questioned that as he was expected to overfly airport and thus not be traffic for cirrus. I asked altitude. Both were at 7800/7900 ft. I suggested citation climb for traffic immediate vicinity. Citation climbed; cirrus ducked under taking evasive action. I saw citation climb rapidly over cirrus. Citation later said he had changed mind on overflt for right downwind due to TCAS traffic 500 ft below. I was not aware of any other traffic at that altitude except cirrus which would have been on citation's left side until he turned into him. ZAB did not let us know about change nor do I believe they passed traffic to the citation on the cirrus which they should have had target on XXXX code. Pilot of cirrus advised me he intended to file report as well. We are long overdue for radar; slaved or standalone. This is the second close call of this type in the past 3 weeks. Supplemental information from acn 755702: flight was an instrument check ride. The applicant completed the procedure turn and was inbound on the VOR 33 approach. While 3-4 mi out; saf tower requested we squawk XXXX for center because there was a citation inbound. We complied. We then heard the citation on the frequency and we announced 3 mi southeast of the VOR on the approach. Saf is a non radar airport and the tower controller acknowledged and thanked us for the report. As we approached the VOR we heard tower query the citation on their altitude. They were at 7900 ft. We were at 7800 ft and just passing the VOR. There was some discussion as to the citation's intention as to how they were going to enter traffic for runway 2 at saf. Tower thought the citation had been instructed to cross over the field and enter left traffic. The citation thought they were supposed to enter right traffic for runway 2. I looked to my right and saw the citation at 3 O'clock position at our altitude and headed in our direction. I announced 'my controls' and took the aircraft from the applicant. I turned away from the citation and descended immediately. The citation passed behind us and entered right traffic for runway 2. I returned the aircraft to the applicant who continued the approach (and the check ride) successfully. Saf tower works diligently to visually separate traffic at this airport. This could have been avoided if there had been clearer handoff from center to tower. It is my understanding that a center training situation may have contributed to the loss of separation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SAF CTLR DESCRIBED NMAC WHEN IFR TFC FAILED TO ENTER PATTERN AS EXPECTED AND CONFLICTED WITH VFR TFC ON PRACTICE VOR APCH.

Narrative: CIRRUS WAS ON PRACTICE VOR 33 APCH VICINITY PROC TURN. AS ZAB HAD IFR INBOUND; I PASSED TFC ON CIRRUS AND REQUESTED BEACON CODE. GIVEN XXXX. ACFT ACKNOWLEDGED; ZAB PASSED CITATION AND REQUESTED TO PASS OVER ARPT FROM FTI VISUAL APCH TO ENTER L DOWNWIND TO RWY 2 FOR DSCNT PURPOSES; WHICH I APPROVED. I HAD ADVISED CIRRUS TO EXPECT CITATION TFC FROM FTI EARLIER. THEN ADVISED CIRRUS THAT CITATION WOULD OVERFLY ARPT TO W SIDE L DOWNWIND. WHEN CITATION CAME UP ON FREQ HE ADVISED HE WAS ON R DOWNWIND TO RWY 2. I ADVISED AND QUESTIONED THAT AS HE WAS EXPECTED TO OVERFLY ARPT AND THUS NOT BE TFC FOR CIRRUS. I ASKED ALT. BOTH WERE AT 7800/7900 FT. I SUGGESTED CITATION CLB FOR TFC IMMEDIATE VICINITY. CITATION CLBED; CIRRUS DUCKED UNDER TAKING EVASIVE ACTION. I SAW CITATION CLB RAPIDLY OVER CIRRUS. CITATION LATER SAID HE HAD CHANGED MIND ON OVERFLT FOR R DOWNWIND DUE TO TCAS TFC 500 FT BELOW. I WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER TFC AT THAT ALT EXCEPT CIRRUS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN ON CITATION'S L SIDE UNTIL HE TURNED INTO HIM. ZAB DID NOT LET US KNOW ABOUT CHANGE NOR DO I BELIEVE THEY PASSED TFC TO THE CITATION ON THE CIRRUS WHICH THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD TARGET ON XXXX CODE. PLT OF CIRRUS ADVISED ME HE INTENDED TO FILE RPT AS WELL. WE ARE LONG OVERDUE FOR RADAR; SLAVED OR STANDALONE. THIS IS THE SECOND CLOSE CALL OF THIS TYPE IN THE PAST 3 WKS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 755702: FLT WAS AN INST CHK RIDE. THE APPLICANT COMPLETED THE PROC TURN AND WAS INBOUND ON THE VOR 33 APCH. WHILE 3-4 MI OUT; SAF TWR REQUESTED WE SQUAWK XXXX FOR CTR BECAUSE THERE WAS A CITATION INBOUND. WE COMPLIED. WE THEN HEARD THE CITATION ON THE FREQ AND WE ANNOUNCED 3 MI SE OF THE VOR ON THE APCH. SAF IS A NON RADAR ARPT AND THE TWR CTLR ACKNOWLEDGED AND THANKED US FOR THE RPT. AS WE APCHED THE VOR WE HEARD TWR QUERY THE CITATION ON THEIR ALT. THEY WERE AT 7900 FT. WE WERE AT 7800 FT AND JUST PASSING THE VOR. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AS TO THE CITATION'S INTENTION AS TO HOW THEY WERE GOING TO ENTER TFC FOR RWY 2 AT SAF. TWR THOUGHT THE CITATION HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO CROSS OVER THE FIELD AND ENTER L TFC. THE CITATION THOUGHT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ENTER R TFC FOR RWY 2. I LOOKED TO MY R AND SAW THE CITATION AT 3 O'CLOCK POS AT OUR ALT AND HEADED IN OUR DIRECTION. I ANNOUNCED 'MY CTLS' AND TOOK THE ACFT FROM THE APPLICANT. I TURNED AWAY FROM THE CITATION AND DSNDED IMMEDIATELY. THE CITATION PASSED BEHIND US AND ENTERED R TFC FOR RWY 2. I RETURNED THE ACFT TO THE APPLICANT WHO CONTINUED THE APCH (AND THE CHK RIDE) SUCCESSFULLY. SAF TWR WORKS DILIGENTLY TO VISUALLY SEPARATE TFC AT THIS ARPT. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF THERE HAD BEEN CLEARER HDOF FROM CTR TO TWR. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A CTR TRAINING SIT MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE LOSS OF SEPARATION.

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.