Narrative:

I had a rude, and fortunately not painful, awakening recently that I thought I would share as a medium hour pilot, I thought I was somewhat familiar with the system and comfortable in my knowledge. I was flying a night flight to a local airport (controller in charge) and decided to practice IFR procedures. The conditions were VFR for the bulk of the flight. While being vectored to the final approach course for an ILS, I felt secure and coddled by my knowledge that ATC was watching out for me and spent time preparing the aircraft for landing and studying the approach plate. When established on the final approach course, about 8 mi out I heard over the chico frequency (tower was closed) some rather unflattering remarks about an aircraft that had just cut ahead of an aircraft that was approaching final. The aircraft was within 1/4 mi and at about 5 O'clock. I bristled at the criticism and sharply retorted, comfortably in my knowledge of the system, that I was under the control of ATC and on an ILS final. There was no response and I queried ATC about the other aircraft and they reported that the aircraft apparently had no mode C and he was not detectable on their radar. I informed my upset colleague of the air that he was invisible to ATC, but alas, no response. Upon landing and reviewing the situation, I became somewhat concerned about my reliance and complacency on the control that flying IFR afforded me and discussing the situation with those that were more knowledgeable, including an employee of the FAA, I learned of my ignorantly misplaced sense of security flying IFR and the responsibility of maintaining vigilance and sep in VFR conditions while IFR. The alluring security of being under the great man's radar surveillance is not nearly as comforting as it appears. Perhaps we forgetful mortals should be retested on the basics more thoroughly and frequently. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: advised type aircraft and the other aircraft type. Altitude was about 3000' at time of incident. Estimated miss distance as 1400'. Had filed IFR from departure station and was under the impression the controller would keep him clear of all traffic. Now understands even though IFR, it is his responsibility to maintain traffic watch for aircraft operating VFR. Was not able to locate the aircraft involved in the conflict.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: IFR SMA MAKING APCH TO NON TWR ARPT ACCUSED OF CUTTING IN FRONT OF ACFT ON APCH.

Narrative: I HAD A RUDE, AND FORTUNATELY NOT PAINFUL, AWAKENING RECENTLY THAT I THOUGHT I WOULD SHARE AS A MEDIUM HOUR PLT, I THOUGHT I WAS SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR WITH THE SYS AND COMFORTABLE IN MY KNOWLEDGE. I WAS FLYING A NIGHT FLT TO A LCL ARPT (CIC) AND DECIDED TO PRACTICE IFR PROCS. THE CONDITIONS WERE VFR FOR THE BULK OF THE FLT. WHILE BEING VECTORED TO THE FINAL APCH COURSE FOR AN ILS, I FELT SECURE AND CODDLED BY MY KNOWLEDGE THAT ATC WAS WATCHING OUT FOR ME AND SPENT TIME PREPARING THE ACFT FOR LNDG AND STUDYING THE APCH PLATE. WHEN ESTABLISHED ON THE FINAL APCH COURSE, ABOUT 8 MI OUT I HEARD OVER THE CHICO FREQ (TWR WAS CLOSED) SOME RATHER UNFLATTERING REMARKS ABOUT AN ACFT THAT HAD JUST CUT AHEAD OF AN ACFT THAT WAS APCHING FINAL. THE ACFT WAS WITHIN 1/4 MI AND AT ABOUT 5 O'CLOCK. I BRISTLED AT THE CRITICISM AND SHARPLY RETORTED, COMFORTABLY IN MY KNOWLEDGE OF THE SYS, THAT I WAS UNDER THE CTL OF ATC AND ON AN ILS FINAL. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE AND I QUERIED ATC ABOUT THE OTHER ACFT AND THEY RPTED THAT THE ACFT APPARENTLY HAD NO MODE C AND HE WAS NOT DETECTABLE ON THEIR RADAR. I INFORMED MY UPSET COLLEAGUE OF THE AIR THAT HE WAS INVISIBLE TO ATC, BUT ALAS, NO RESPONSE. UPON LNDG AND REVIEWING THE SITUATION, I BECAME SOMEWHAT CONCERNED ABOUT MY RELIANCE AND COMPLACENCY ON THE CTL THAT FLYING IFR AFFORDED ME AND DISCUSSING THE SITUATION WITH THOSE THAT WERE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE, INCLUDING AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FAA, I LEARNED OF MY IGNORANTLY MISPLACED SENSE OF SECURITY FLYING IFR AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MAINTAINING VIGILANCE AND SEP IN VFR CONDITIONS WHILE IFR. THE ALLURING SECURITY OF BEING UNDER THE GREAT MAN'S RADAR SURVEILLANCE IS NOT NEARLY AS COMFORTING AS IT APPEARS. PERHAPS WE FORGETFUL MORTALS SHOULD BE RETESTED ON THE BASICS MORE THOROUGHLY AND FREQUENTLY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: ADVISED TYPE ACFT AND THE OTHER ACFT TYPE. ALT WAS ABOUT 3000' AT TIME OF INCIDENT. ESTIMATED MISS DISTANCE AS 1400'. HAD FILED IFR FROM DEP STATION AND WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THE CTLR WOULD KEEP HIM CLR OF ALL TFC. NOW UNDERSTANDS EVEN THOUGH IFR, IT IS HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN TFC WATCH FOR ACFT OPERATING VFR. WAS NOT ABLE TO LOCATE THE ACFT INVOLVED IN THE CONFLICT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.