Narrative:

I was acting as PIC ferrying the aircraft from to awo (arlington municipal; wa). The near miss occurred just prior to landing at awo. Conditions of flight included an IMC departure. Upon leaving the departure area; conditions were VMC on the entire route; with skies clear and 10 SM at awo. Flight time was 2.8 hours; including a light tailwind. I obtained a flight briefing from FSS one hour before departure; including a detailed weather and NOTAM brief. I was aware of the arlington airshow fly-in commencing; and requested specific information from the briefer regarding any special procedures that were in effect. The only active notams for awo were: the first NOTAM refers to the tfr for the aerobatic box. The second NOTAM refers to one of two closed runways. The briefer was unable to locate any special procedures for the airport in the notams system. The flight to the terminal area was uneventful. Approaching awo; PIC obtained AWOS and noted the winds were calm. Switching to CTAF; PIC contacted arlington traffic and received no reply. PIC knew that there were multiple aircraft in the area and elected to overfly the airport to determine traffic direction. PIC and observer noted an aircraft departing runway 34 executing what appeared to be a crosswind departure; immediately following; PIC and observer noted another aircraft departing runway 34 southbound. PIC was very concerned that no traffic advisories were broadcast on CTAF; and with fuel approaching minimum fuel; elected to set up for a right base entry to runway 34. Both PIC and observer were aware that multiple aircraft were in the vicinity and were executing an aggressive visual lookout. PIC continued to make standard traffic calls over CTAF on base; final; and short final. Descending through 200 AGL the PIC saw two aircraft; level; on parallel courses on runway centerline and just east of centerline; head-to-head with PIC's aircraft. PIC maneuvered aggressively left to avoid both aircraft and executed a go-around. On climbout; PIC was contacted over CTAF and informed that a temporary tower frequency was in effect and traffic flow into the airport was being managed using special procedures. PIC contacted the temporary tower and received sequencing into the airport for a safe landing. Contributing factors included: PIC was not from the local area and did not have local knowledge of special airshow procedures. PIC was not an airshow participant. PIC was unable to determine traffic direction based on visual lookout. PIC was unable to find the special procedures published for the awo airshow. After the incident; PIC found detailed instructions on the internet for airshow participants. The quality of the instructions was excellent. These instructions were not referred to in the notams system; and since PIC was not participating in the airshow; PIC was unaware that these procedures had been published. The temporary tower and ATIS frequencies were not mentioned in the notams for awo. The FSS briefer was unable to find any mention of them. Awo AWOS did not broadcast the temporary tower frequency or temporary ATIS frequency. Corrective action recommended: request all temporary airspace procedures for airshows to be referenced in the notams system; allowing airmen to look up the procedures if they are published on the internet; request AWOS to broadcast the temporary tower and ATIS frequencies. Human performance factors: visual lookout. PIC observed aircraft departing both directions from same runway and misidentified actual traffic direction. At the end of the day; see-and-avoid prevented a mishap; but barely.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: The FSS Briefer did not find a special AWO air show arrival procedure notice so a pilot approached the airport using CTAF procedures and had a near miss with an aircraft following ATC direction.

Narrative: I was acting as PIC ferrying the aircraft from to AWO (Arlington Municipal; WA). The near miss occurred just prior to landing at AWO. Conditions of flight included an IMC departure. Upon leaving the departure area; conditions were VMC on the entire route; with skies clear and 10 SM at AWO. Flight time was 2.8 hours; including a light tailwind. I obtained a flight briefing from FSS one hour before departure; including a detailed weather and NOTAM brief. I was aware of the Arlington airshow fly-in commencing; and requested specific information from the briefer regarding any special procedures that were in effect. The only active NOTAMs for AWO were: The first NOTAM refers to the TFR for the aerobatic box. The second NOTAM refers to one of two closed runways. The briefer was unable to locate any special procedures for the airport in the NOTAMs system. The flight to the terminal area was uneventful. Approaching AWO; PIC obtained AWOS and noted the winds were calm. Switching to CTAF; PIC contacted Arlington Traffic and received no reply. PIC knew that there were multiple aircraft in the area and elected to overfly the airport to determine traffic direction. PIC and observer noted an aircraft departing Runway 34 executing what appeared to be a crosswind departure; immediately following; PIC and observer noted another aircraft departing Runway 34 southbound. PIC was very concerned that no traffic advisories were broadcast on CTAF; and with fuel approaching minimum fuel; elected to set up for a right base entry to Runway 34. Both PIC and observer were aware that multiple aircraft were in the vicinity and were executing an aggressive visual lookout. PIC continued to make standard traffic calls over CTAF on base; final; and short final. Descending through 200 AGL the PIC saw two aircraft; level; on parallel courses on runway centerline and just east of centerline; head-to-head with PIC's aircraft. PIC maneuvered aggressively left to avoid both aircraft and executed a go-around. On climbout; PIC was contacted over CTAF and informed that a temporary Tower frequency was in effect and traffic flow into the airport was being managed using special procedures. PIC contacted the temporary Tower and received sequencing into the airport for a safe landing. Contributing factors included: PIC was not from the local area and did not have local knowledge of special airshow procedures. PIC was not an airshow participant. PIC was unable to determine traffic direction based on visual lookout. PIC was unable to find the special procedures published for the AWO airshow. After the incident; PIC found detailed instructions on the internet for airshow participants. The quality of the instructions was excellent. These instructions were not referred to in the NOTAMs system; and since PIC was not participating in the airshow; PIC was unaware that these procedures had been published. The temporary Tower and ATIS frequencies were not mentioned in the NOTAMs for AWO. The FSS briefer was unable to find any mention of them. AWO AWOS did not broadcast the temporary Tower frequency or temporary ATIS frequency. Corrective action recommended: Request all temporary airspace procedures for airshows to be referenced in the NOTAMs system; allowing airmen to look up the procedures if they are published on the internet; request AWOS to broadcast the temporary Tower and ATIS frequencies. Human performance factors: Visual lookout. PIC observed aircraft departing both directions from same runway and misidentified actual traffic direction. At the end of the day; see-and-avoid prevented a mishap; but barely.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.