Close proximity of 2 GA small aircraft's entering air traffic area at prc.

Attributes
ACN	181174
Time
Date	199106
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : prc
State Reference	AZ
Altitude	msl bound lower : 6000 msl bound upper : 6000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : prc tracon : roc
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	other
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	VFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 1550 flight time type : 1200
ASRS Report	181174
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Events
Anomaly	conflict : nmac
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 30 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

We were approximately 6 mi west at 8000' MSL. The tower instructed us to report a 2 mi right 45 degree entry for runway 21. Upon reaching the 2 mi right 45 degree, we suddenly noticed another small aircraft Z at our 2 O'clock position, almost paralleling our course but converging. The made an evasive left turn, approximately 60-70 degrees of bank. This aircraft later went by the call sign of XXXX and was instructed to follow us to the airport. It didn't appear that the other aircraft noticed us because he was not seen to take any evasive action. We here at prc, I believe, have all become too dependent on tower personnel trying to make traffic advisories and plan radar controller like in a TCA. However, we here at prc don't have radar. It is my belief that we all need to look around more, we should not rely on tower to advise us of traffic, and tower should be consistant; if they want to maintain spacing and sep like down in the phx TCA, they should have the radar to do the job properly. If they don't have radar, advise that traffic is also 'reported' inbound from the same general position.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLOSE PROX OF 2 GA SMA'S ENTERING ATA AT PRC.

Narrative: WE WERE APPROX 6 MI W AT 8000' MSL. THE TWR INSTRUCTED US TO RPT A 2 MI RIGHT 45 DEG ENTRY FOR RWY 21. UPON REACHING THE 2 MI RIGHT 45 DEG, WE SUDDENLY NOTICED ANOTHER SMA Z AT OUR 2 O'CLOCK POS, ALMOST PARALLELING OUR COURSE BUT CONVERGING. THE MADE AN EVASIVE LEFT TURN, APPROX 60-70 DEGS OF BANK. THIS ACFT LATER WENT BY THE CALL SIGN OF XXXX AND WAS INSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW US TO THE ARPT. IT DIDN'T APPEAR THAT THE OTHER ACFT NOTICED US BECAUSE HE WAS NOT SEEN TO TAKE ANY EVASIVE ACTION. WE HERE AT PRC, I BELIEVE, HAVE ALL BECOME TOO DEPENDENT ON TWR PERSONNEL TRYING TO MAKE TFC ADVISORIES AND PLAN RADAR CTLR LIKE IN A TCA. HOWEVER, WE HERE AT PRC DON'T HAVE RADAR. IT IS MY BELIEF THAT WE ALL NEED TO LOOK AROUND MORE, WE SHOULD NOT RELY ON TWR TO ADVISE US OF TFC, AND TWR SHOULD BE CONSISTANT; IF THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN SPACING AND SEP LIKE DOWN IN THE PHX TCA, THEY SHOULD HAVE THE RADAR TO DO THE JOB PROPERLY. IF THEY DON'T HAVE RADAR, ADVISE THAT TFC IS ALSO 'RPTED' INBND FROM THE SAME GENERAL POS.

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.