Narrative:

On controlled approach [we were cleared to land by the tower] into runway xx at ZZZ; a departing airplane (single engine personal) passed almost directly over us with approximately 100 ft. - 150 ft. Separation. Apparently this aircraft made a right turn out on departure from runway 17 and then another right turn to depart to the north as we were turning final to the south. The reason for this report is that the tower did not advise us of oncoming traffic or sound any alert (this is the reason we have a tower at ZZZ after all). In this instance; the presence of a manned tower actually created more risk than would have an untowered airport because at the latter; the pilots would have been talking to each other and made each other aware of their position and proximity.there was a relatively new controller working approaches and departures at the time; this was definitely a factor. However; the senior controller at this facility was working 'ground' and presumably was backing up the new controller. However; the relatively new controller apparently was not advised to alert us to oncoming traffic. I have X00 hours flying into and out of this airport with over a thousand landings at ZZZ and this was the closest unalerted 'miss' I have experienced. There should have been an alert voiced; I almost took evasive action and would have had the oncoming plane been any closer. Its fortunate we saw the traffic but only did so with 300 ft. Horizontal separation. The 'new' controller has been working at this facility for approximately X months and ZZZ is not that busy of an airport. Basic pilot approach/departure traffic alerts should be nearly automatic by now. This controller requires close supervision and; if performance does not improve; reassignment may be indicated to maintain safety.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RV7A Single Pilot reported a new tower controller failed to provide departure aircraft alert thereby resulting in an NMAC event.

Narrative: On controlled approach [we were cleared to land by the tower] into Runway XX at ZZZ; a departing airplane (single engine personal) passed almost directly over us with approximately 100 ft. - 150 ft. separation. Apparently this aircraft made a right turn out on departure from Runway 17 and then another right turn to depart to the north as we were turning final to the south. The reason for this report is that the tower did not advise us of oncoming traffic or sound any alert (this is the reason we have a tower at ZZZ after all). In this instance; the presence of a manned tower actually created more risk than would have an untowered airport because at the latter; the pilots would have been talking to each other and made each other aware of their position and proximity.There was a relatively new controller working approaches and departures at the time; this was definitely a factor. However; the senior controller at this facility was working 'ground' and presumably was backing up the new controller. However; the relatively new controller apparently was not advised to alert us to oncoming traffic. I have X00 hours flying into and out of this airport with over a thousand landings at ZZZ and this was the closest unalerted 'miss' I have experienced. There should have been an alert voiced; I almost took evasive action and would have had the oncoming plane been any closer. Its fortunate we saw the traffic but only did so with 300 ft. horizontal separation. The 'new' controller has been working at this facility for approximately X months and ZZZ is not that busy of an airport. Basic pilot approach/departure traffic alerts should be nearly automatic by now. This controller requires close supervision and; if performance does not improve; reassignment may be indicated to maintain safety.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.