Narrative:

On jun/xa/99, my student and I, flying a C172M, were involved in an near midair collision while practicing takeoff and landing procedures at the griffith-merrillville airport. The other aircraft involved was a C172RG. At XA15 local time, my student and I departed on our first takeoff and landing procedure of the day in a l-hand pattern for runway 26. The winds were light and variable and ceiling and visibility were unrestr. At approximately the same time, a helicopter entered the pattern and began using r-hand traffic for runway 26. The helicopter and I proceeded to make takeoff and lndgs for the next 45 mins. At approximately XC00 local time, a third aircraft called in and reported he was 4 mi out and going to enter r-hand traffic for the airport, not giving a runway number, or calling the unicom for an airport advisory to determine traffic or runway in use. At this point my student and I decided he would enter r-hand traffic like the helicopter and we would just watch for him. As we departed runway 26, like we had been doing for the last 45 mins, we climbed to 500 ft AGL and began our left turn to crosswind. As we continued to climb out and turned crosswind, the cessna cutlass 172RG passed over the top of us in a descent approximately 100 ft above in the opposite direction on a right base for runway 8 and then continued to land on runway 8. After we dove away to miss him and re-established our pattern on downwind, I contacted the pilot on the radio and asked him if he was aware that traffic at griffith was l-hand, the runway in use was runway 26 and that he almost caused a midair collision. His exact reply was, 'you need to grow up and watch where you are going!' I immediately landed our airplane, got out and went to the building he was in. When I proceeded to ask him if I was the one who needed to grow up and watch where I was going when he was the one who almost caused 3 people to die because of his blatant disregard for proper flight procedures, the argument began. He told me then that he had me in sight the whole time and it was no big deal. So not only did he disregard the recommended airport procedures, but he operated his aircraft in an unsafe manner creating an undue hazard for both aircraft. I finally said to him, 'I am not going to argue with you, if you're not going to follow the recommended procedures given by the FAA and continue to endanger other pilots' lives, I will just turn you in to the FAA and let them handle it!' at this point he began denying all that he had done wrong and said he was making a straight-in approach for the runway and since he called 4 mi out he could do whatever he wanted and it was not his fault and I should have gotten out of his way. I then said it again and we both walked away. I then returned to my student and airplane and we began our training once again. As we did, he followed us out and was trying to say more, but he could not get his radio to work, all he was sending out was a carrier wave, no voice. When he finally got it working again, he asked the helicopter for a radio check and then said this, 'helicopter at griffith would you mind explaining to me why you can make r-hand traffic all day long and 'hot-dog boy' over here is giving me all kinds of hell for making r-hand traffic.' the helicopter replied, 'well, helicopters are supposed to use opposite traffic patterns to avoid the fixed wing traffic.' he then replied, 'oh, ok, I thought 'hot-dog boy' just had it in for me.' I realize that people make mistakes, I make them myself, but I also am not too big to admit my errors. Normally I do not make this big of a deal out of someone's errors but this person had no idea or remorse about the actual severity of his error. As an instructor, I am trying to teach my students the correct rules and procedures to be used at all airports. This pilot showed my student exactly what not to do as far as flying traffic patterns, radio communication procedures, preflight planning and disregarding FARS 91.13 and 91.103. In my professional opinion, this pilot is a danger to all other pilots while he is flying with that type of attitude. His blatant disregard for recommended procedures, FARS, and overall flight safety demonstrates the need for re-evaluation of this pilot and his certificate.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DEP C172 TRAINING ACFT ALMOST GETS HIT BY A C172RG LNDG OPPOSITE DIRECTION AT 05C, IN.

Narrative: ON JUN/XA/99, MY STUDENT AND I, FLYING A C172M, WERE INVOLVED IN AN NMAC WHILE PRACTICING TKOF AND LNDG PROCS AT THE GRIFFITH-MERRILLVILLE ARPT. THE OTHER ACFT INVOLVED WAS A C172RG. AT XA15 LCL TIME, MY STUDENT AND I DEPARTED ON OUR FIRST TKOF AND LNDG PROC OF THE DAY IN A L-HAND PATTERN FOR RWY 26. THE WINDS WERE LIGHT AND VARIABLE AND CEILING AND VISIBILITY WERE UNRESTR. AT APPROX THE SAME TIME, A HELI ENTERED THE PATTERN AND BEGAN USING R-HAND TFC FOR RWY 26. THE HELI AND I PROCEEDED TO MAKE TKOF AND LNDGS FOR THE NEXT 45 MINS. AT APPROX XC00 LCL TIME, A THIRD ACFT CALLED IN AND RPTED HE WAS 4 MI OUT AND GOING TO ENTER R-HAND TFC FOR THE ARPT, NOT GIVING A RWY NUMBER, OR CALLING THE UNICOM FOR AN ARPT ADVISORY TO DETERMINE TFC OR RWY IN USE. AT THIS POINT MY STUDENT AND I DECIDED HE WOULD ENTER R-HAND TFC LIKE THE HELI AND WE WOULD JUST WATCH FOR HIM. AS WE DEPARTED RWY 26, LIKE WE HAD BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST 45 MINS, WE CLBED TO 500 FT AGL AND BEGAN OUR L TURN TO XWIND. AS WE CONTINUED TO CLB OUT AND TURNED XWIND, THE CESSNA CUTLASS 172RG PASSED OVER THE TOP OF US IN A DSCNT APPROX 100 FT ABOVE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION ON A R BASE FOR RWY 8 AND THEN CONTINUED TO LAND ON RWY 8. AFTER WE DOVE AWAY TO MISS HIM AND RE-ESTABLISHED OUR PATTERN ON DOWNWIND, I CONTACTED THE PLT ON THE RADIO AND ASKED HIM IF HE WAS AWARE THAT TFC AT GRIFFITH WAS L-HAND, THE RWY IN USE WAS RWY 26 AND THAT HE ALMOST CAUSED A MIDAIR COLLISION. HIS EXACT REPLY WAS, 'YOU NEED TO GROW UP AND WATCH WHERE YOU ARE GOING!' I IMMEDIATELY LANDED OUR AIRPLANE, GOT OUT AND WENT TO THE BUILDING HE WAS IN. WHEN I PROCEEDED TO ASK HIM IF I WAS THE ONE WHO NEEDED TO GROW UP AND WATCH WHERE I WAS GOING WHEN HE WAS THE ONE WHO ALMOST CAUSED 3 PEOPLE TO DIE BECAUSE OF HIS BLATANT DISREGARD FOR PROPER FLT PROCS, THE ARGUMENT BEGAN. HE TOLD ME THEN THAT HE HAD ME IN SIGHT THE WHOLE TIME AND IT WAS NO BIG DEAL. SO NOT ONLY DID HE DISREGARD THE RECOMMENDED ARPT PROCS, BUT HE OPERATED HIS ACFT IN AN UNSAFE MANNER CREATING AN UNDUE HAZARD FOR BOTH ACFT. I FINALLY SAID TO HIM, 'I AM NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH YOU, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDED PROCS GIVEN BY THE FAA AND CONTINUE TO ENDANGER OTHER PLTS' LIVES, I WILL JUST TURN YOU IN TO THE FAA AND LET THEM HANDLE IT!' AT THIS POINT HE BEGAN DENYING ALL THAT HE HAD DONE WRONG AND SAID HE WAS MAKING A STRAIGHT-IN APCH FOR THE RWY AND SINCE HE CALLED 4 MI OUT HE COULD DO WHATEVER HE WANTED AND IT WAS NOT HIS FAULT AND I SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OUT OF HIS WAY. I THEN SAID IT AGAIN AND WE BOTH WALKED AWAY. I THEN RETURNED TO MY STUDENT AND AIRPLANE AND WE BEGAN OUR TRAINING ONCE AGAIN. AS WE DID, HE FOLLOWED US OUT AND WAS TRYING TO SAY MORE, BUT HE COULD NOT GET HIS RADIO TO WORK, ALL HE WAS SENDING OUT WAS A CARRIER WAVE, NO VOICE. WHEN HE FINALLY GOT IT WORKING AGAIN, HE ASKED THE HELI FOR A RADIO CHK AND THEN SAID THIS, 'HELI AT GRIFFITH WOULD YOU MIND EXPLAINING TO ME WHY YOU CAN MAKE R-HAND TFC ALL DAY LONG AND 'HOT-DOG BOY' OVER HERE IS GIVING ME ALL KINDS OF HELL FOR MAKING R-HAND TFC.' THE HELI REPLIED, 'WELL, HELIS ARE SUPPOSED TO USE OPPOSITE TFC PATTERNS TO AVOID THE FIXED WING TFC.' HE THEN REPLIED, 'OH, OK, I THOUGHT 'HOT-DOG BOY' JUST HAD IT IN FOR ME.' I REALIZE THAT PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES, I MAKE THEM MYSELF, BUT I ALSO AM NOT TOO BIG TO ADMIT MY ERRORS. NORMALLY I DO NOT MAKE THIS BIG OF A DEAL OUT OF SOMEONE'S ERRORS BUT THIS PERSON HAD NO IDEA OR REMORSE ABOUT THE ACTUAL SEVERITY OF HIS ERROR. AS AN INSTRUCTOR, I AM TRYING TO TEACH MY STUDENTS THE CORRECT RULES AND PROCS TO BE USED AT ALL ARPTS. THIS PLT SHOWED MY STUDENT EXACTLY WHAT NOT TO DO AS FAR AS FLYING TFC PATTERNS, RADIO COM PROCS, PREFLT PLANNING AND DISREGARDING FARS 91.13 AND 91.103. IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THIS PLT IS A DANGER TO ALL OTHER PLTS WHILE HE IS FLYING WITH THAT TYPE OF ATTITUDE. HIS BLATANT DISREGARD FOR RECOMMENDED PROCS, FARS, AND OVERALL FLT SAFETY DEMONSTRATES THE NEED FOR RE-EVALUATION OF THIS PLT AND HIS CERTIFICATE.

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.