<< >> NASA ASRS Report 196916, December 1991

Instructor with student in twin being vectored for approach to ftg airport had near midair collision with unannounced small aircraft twin.

Attributes
ACN	196916
Time
Date	199112
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : den
State Reference	CO
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : den
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 2 Eng, Retractable Gear
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	None
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 2 Eng, Retractable Gear
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 225 flight time total : 1300 flight time type : 75
ASRS Report	196916
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : student
Events
Anomaly	conflict : nmac other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : insufficient time
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 50 vertical : 50
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

I was instructing in a twin. We were in radar contact being vectored for an approach (ILS) into ftg by den approach. Another aircraft flew over us (I believe it was an small aircraft, but it was a blur as it went by). I think the contributing factors are I was watching the instruments and teaching. I feel I do a good job of watching for traffic. But I feel it was a combination of 2 twins approaching at a good speed. I also may have been relying on approach some for the TA. As for why approach didn't tell me about the aircraft, I don't know. He did apologize for it after the aircraft had gone by. He did not seem that busy. Solution: more diligence when flying in faster aircraft, don't rely on approach at all, because that 1 time they don't say anything may be it. If approach is going to give you vectors for a practice approach, they need to pay more attention. If they don't have time, don't say they can do it. It seems like he was only half way helping and it could have hurt more than helped.

Related reports:

• Instructor pilot reported a unannounced vehicle on and near ...
• An instructor and student announced their intentions and beg...
• GA flight instructor reported a ground conflict on takeoff f...

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.37000feet.com

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR WITH STUDENT IN TWIN BEING VECTORED FOR APCH TO FTG ARPT HAD NMAC WITH UNANNOUNCED SMA TWIN.

Narrative: I WAS INSTRUCTING IN A TWIN. WE WERE IN RADAR CONTACT BEING VECTORED FOR AN APCH (ILS) INTO FTG BY DEN APCH. ANOTHER ACFT FLEW OVER US (I BELIEVE IT WAS AN SMA, BUT IT WAS A BLUR AS IT WENT BY). I THINK THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS ARE I WAS WATCHING THE INSTS AND TEACHING. I FEEL I DO A GOOD JOB OF WATCHING FOR TFC. BUT I FEEL IT WAS A COMBINATION OF 2 TWINS APCHING AT A GOOD SPD. I ALSO MAY HAVE BEEN RELYING ON APCH SOME FOR THE TA. AS FOR WHY APCH DIDN'T TELL ME ABOUT THE ACFT, I DON'T KNOW. HE DID APOLOGIZE FOR IT AFTER THE ACFT HAD GONE BY. HE DID NOT SEEM THAT BUSY. SOLUTION: MORE DILIGENCE WHEN FLYING IN FASTER ACFT, DON'T RELY ON APCH AT ALL, BECAUSE THAT 1 TIME THEY DON'T SAY ANYTHING MAY BE IT. IF APCH IS GOING TO GIVE YOU VECTORS FOR A PRACTICE APCH, THEY NEED TO PAY MORE ATTN. IF THEY DON'T HAVE TIME, DON'T SAY THEY CAN DO IT. IT SEEMS LIKE HE WAS ONLY HALF WAY HELPING AND IT COULD HAVE HURT MORE THAN HELPED.

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.