Narrative:

Small aircraft X initially entered the traffic pattern from the practice area requesting touch and go's with left traffic at 1000'. Y was already in the traffic pattern practicing stop and go's. On the third pattern around, X awaited tower direction for left turnout but received no reply so requested a left turnout. Tower approved left closed pattern. After X was just about midfield left downwind (position #1), tower instructed X to extend left downwind in order to follow Y just turning right crosswind after being instructed to do so by tower (position #2). X acknowledged, then stated: 'but Y is on crosswind and X is downwind,' questioning ATC instructions. The tower did not reply to the query. During check ride at that time, I brought power to idle to do power-off landing and student in X responded correctly to simulated engine failure by turning left base and reporting to tower (position #3). Tower took more than 60 seconds to reply, finally clearing X to land. X acknowledged. Y had not yet reached position abeam the #'south on right downwind (position #4). Tower then instructed Y to extend downwind to follow X on base who would be full stop. Y acknowledged. At this time, X was turning final with more than enough sep between us and Y. Wondering why tower cleared X for full stop, X requested the option. Tower did not reply. X then stated, 'this will not be a full stop landing.' still, tower did not reply. Then an aircraft was calling requesting transition through airspace and tower proceeded to clear aircraft over the river, to the west. Y then called right base for the option and tower cleared Y for the option (position #6). X performed touch and go, proceeding to continue around the pattern for a full stop landing to follow since tower instructions were so confusing. Y performed stop and go and did not have to do a go around since there was proper sep limits during that pattern. There were only those 2 aircraft in the pattern at the time all this confusion took place. 2 small aircraft's. X did not cause a hazard nor did the CFI on board try to second guess the tower instructions. Tower seemed confused and very slow to react that day. The aircraft were put in opposing traffic patterns when maybe they should have been instructed to follow each other on the same downwind. Extending downwind as ATC requested would have put X in a precarious position due to the opposing traffic and other traffic out over the river transitioning through the airspace in that vicinity as well as the possibility had engine failure occurred glide distance would be greatly hampered. I believe that I acted in the best interest of safety in such a confusion situation. The enclosed letter from ATC states actions they believed occurred. The person who wrote it was not in the tower. It was written at the request of the employer. The letter would not go any further and charges would not be filed against me as CFI. I felt I should notify base commander after chain of command was exhausted and he is looking into the matter.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA CFI DISREGARDS MIL CTLR'S CLRNC AND INSTRUCTIONS AND RUNS HER OWN TRAFFIC PATTERN AS SHE VIES FOR POSITION RELATIVE TO OTHER TRAFFIC IN PATTERN.

Narrative: SMA X INITIALLY ENTERED THE TFC PATTERN FROM THE PRACTICE AREA REQUESTING TOUCH AND GO'S WITH LEFT TFC AT 1000'. Y WAS ALREADY IN THE TFC PATTERN PRACTICING STOP AND GO'S. ON THE THIRD PATTERN AROUND, X AWAITED TWR DIRECTION FOR LEFT TURNOUT BUT RECEIVED NO REPLY SO REQUESTED A LEFT TURNOUT. TWR APPROVED LEFT CLOSED PATTERN. AFTER X WAS JUST ABOUT MIDFIELD LEFT DOWNWIND (POS #1), TWR INSTRUCTED X TO EXTEND LEFT DOWNWIND IN ORDER TO FOLLOW Y JUST TURNING RIGHT XWIND AFTER BEING INSTRUCTED TO DO SO BY TWR (POS #2). X ACKNOWLEDGED, THEN STATED: 'BUT Y IS ON XWIND AND X IS DOWNWIND,' QUESTIONING ATC INSTRUCTIONS. THE TWR DID NOT REPLY TO THE QUERY. DURING CHK RIDE AT THAT TIME, I BROUGHT PWR TO IDLE TO DO PWR-OFF LNDG AND STUDENT IN X RESPONDED CORRECTLY TO SIMULATED ENG FAILURE BY TURNING LEFT BASE AND RPTING TO TWR (POS #3). TWR TOOK MORE THAN 60 SECS TO REPLY, FINALLY CLRING X TO LAND. X ACKNOWLEDGED. Y HAD NOT YET REACHED POS ABEAM THE #'S ON RIGHT DOWNWIND (POS #4). TWR THEN INSTRUCTED Y TO EXTEND DOWNWIND TO FOLLOW X ON BASE WHO WOULD BE FULL STOP. Y ACKNOWLEDGED. AT THIS TIME, X WAS TURNING FINAL WITH MORE THAN ENOUGH SEP BTWN US AND Y. WONDERING WHY TWR CLRED X FOR FULL STOP, X REQUESTED THE OPTION. TWR DID NOT REPLY. X THEN STATED, 'THIS WILL NOT BE A FULL STOP LNDG.' STILL, TWR DID NOT REPLY. THEN AN ACFT WAS CALLING REQUESTING TRANSITION THROUGH AIRSPACE AND TWR PROCEEDED TO CLR ACFT OVER THE RIVER, TO THE W. Y THEN CALLED RIGHT BASE FOR THE OPTION AND TWR CLRED Y FOR THE OPTION (POS #6). X PERFORMED TOUCH AND GO, PROCEEDING TO CONTINUE AROUND THE PATTERN FOR A FULL STOP LNDG TO FOLLOW SINCE TWR INSTRUCTIONS WERE SO CONFUSING. Y PERFORMED STOP AND GO AND DID NOT HAVE TO DO A GAR SINCE THERE WAS PROPER SEP LIMITS DURING THAT PATTERN. THERE WERE ONLY THOSE 2 ACFT IN THE PATTERN AT THE TIME ALL THIS CONFUSION TOOK PLACE. 2 SMA'S. X DID NOT CAUSE A HAZARD NOR DID THE CFI ON BOARD TRY TO SECOND GUESS THE TWR INSTRUCTIONS. TWR SEEMED CONFUSED AND VERY SLOW TO REACT THAT DAY. THE ACFT WERE PUT IN OPPOSING TFC PATTERNS WHEN MAYBE THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW EACH OTHER ON THE SAME DOWNWIND. EXTENDING DOWNWIND AS ATC REQUESTED WOULD HAVE PUT X IN A PRECARIOUS POS DUE TO THE OPPOSING TFC AND OTHER TFC OUT OVER THE RIVER TRANSITIONING THROUGH THE AIRSPACE IN THAT VICINITY AS WELL AS THE POSSIBILITY HAD ENG FAILURE OCCURRED GLIDE DISTANCE WOULD BE GREATLY HAMPERED. I BELIEVE THAT I ACTED IN THE BEST INTEREST OF SAFETY IN SUCH A CONFUSION SITUATION. THE ENCLOSED LETTER FROM ATC STATES ACTIONS THEY BELIEVED OCCURRED. THE PERSON WHO WROTE IT WAS NOT IN THE TWR. IT WAS WRITTEN AT THE REQUEST OF THE EMPLOYER. THE LETTER WOULD NOT GO ANY FURTHER AND CHARGES WOULD NOT BE FILED AGAINST ME AS CFI. I FELT I SHOULD NOTIFY BASE COMMANDER AFTER CHAIN OF COMMAND WAS EXHAUSTED AND HE IS LOOKING INTO THE MATTER.

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