Narrative:

Our aircraft had 2 on board on a routine instrument training flight. I was the PNF who is a cfii with roughly 5000 total hours of which roughly 3000 hours is dual given. The PF being an instrument rated pilot with roughly 300 hours total flight time. The occurrence was while flying a practice ILS 6 approach into pym. It was a routine flight to airports both pilots are very familiar to include the idiosyncrasies of the area and airspace. We had just been to ewb and executed a routine GPS 5 approach while under the control of pvd approach. We were on our way back to pym under VFR conditions and pvd released us to the CTAF at pym and told us to change our transponder code to 1200. We were executing the ILS 6 into pym under VFR conditions approximately 8 NM out with a centered localizer at 1600 ft MSL awaiting GS intercept. We had made at least 1 call on the CTAF to announce our position and intentions. I was sitting in the right seat and saw an aircraft overtaking us at my 4-5 O'clock position at our altitude making what looked like an evasive steep bank maneuver to avoid a collision. We continued the approach and landed. We did not hear anyone announce that they were in our area of executing a practice ILS 6 into pym. It had appeared that they might have been executing a practice ILS 6 as well but were behind us; faster and consequently overtaking us. The airspace in this area is busy and shared by more than 1 approach control facility which overlap in certain situations. Also; the airport serves a high number of training flts coupled with flight schools; etc; being located on the field at pym. I believe that if pym had a control tower and we had been handed off from pvd approach control to a tower; that this occurrence may not have taken place.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A FLT INSTRUCTOR WITH A STUDENT REPORTS AN NMAC AT PYM WITH ANOTHER ACFT THAT APPARENTLY DID NOT USE RECOMMENDED CTAF COM PROCEDURES.

Narrative: OUR ACFT HAD 2 ON BOARD ON A ROUTINE INST TRAINING FLT. I WAS THE PNF WHO IS A CFII WITH ROUGHLY 5000 TOTAL HRS OF WHICH ROUGHLY 3000 HRS IS DUAL GIVEN. THE PF BEING AN INST RATED PLT WITH ROUGHLY 300 HRS TOTAL FLT TIME. THE OCCURRENCE WAS WHILE FLYING A PRACTICE ILS 6 APCH INTO PYM. IT WAS A ROUTINE FLT TO ARPTS BOTH PLTS ARE VERY FAMILIAR TO INCLUDE THE IDIOSYNCRASIES OF THE AREA AND AIRSPACE. WE HAD JUST BEEN TO EWB AND EXECUTED A ROUTINE GPS 5 APCH WHILE UNDER THE CTL OF PVD APCH. WE WERE ON OUR WAY BACK TO PYM UNDER VFR CONDITIONS AND PVD RELEASED US TO THE CTAF AT PYM AND TOLD US TO CHANGE OUR XPONDER CODE TO 1200. WE WERE EXECUTING THE ILS 6 INTO PYM UNDER VFR CONDITIONS APPROX 8 NM OUT WITH A CTRED LOC AT 1600 FT MSL AWAITING GS INTERCEPT. WE HAD MADE AT LEAST 1 CALL ON THE CTAF TO ANNOUNCE OUR POS AND INTENTIONS. I WAS SITTING IN THE R SEAT AND SAW AN ACFT OVERTAKING US AT MY 4-5 O'CLOCK POS AT OUR ALT MAKING WHAT LOOKED LIKE AN EVASIVE STEEP BANK MANEUVER TO AVOID A COLLISION. WE CONTINUED THE APCH AND LANDED. WE DID NOT HEAR ANYONE ANNOUNCE THAT THEY WERE IN OUR AREA OF EXECUTING A PRACTICE ILS 6 INTO PYM. IT HAD APPEARED THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN EXECUTING A PRACTICE ILS 6 AS WELL BUT WERE BEHIND US; FASTER AND CONSEQUENTLY OVERTAKING US. THE AIRSPACE IN THIS AREA IS BUSY AND SHARED BY MORE THAN 1 APCH CTL FACILITY WHICH OVERLAP IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS. ALSO; THE ARPT SERVES A HIGH NUMBER OF TRAINING FLTS COUPLED WITH FLT SCHOOLS; ETC; BEING LOCATED ON THE FIELD AT PYM. I BELIEVE THAT IF PYM HAD A CTL TWR AND WE HAD BEEN HANDED OFF FROM PVD APCH CTL TO A TWR; THAT THIS OCCURRENCE MAY NOT HAVE TAKEN PLACE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.