Narrative:

Flight originated at dpa at XA00 as a sight-seeing flight around chicago. As a 200 hour private pilot sel, I contracted with local FBO for use of an archer and a CFI. Before starting engine, I established that CFI was PIC for the flight. I had no papers and was not fully prepared to act as PIC for flight in unfamiliar area. I handled all controls for the duration of the flight and CFI handled radios, GPS, and communications. Upon return, initial call to dpa ATC was 7.5 mi northeast. The frequency was fairly busy prior. ATC gave us left base runway 15 report 2 mi. Another aircraft called in a few mins later from the north and given similar instructions. I don't recall the specifics but remember that this traffic could be a factor and suspect that this was the other aircraft involved. When reporting 2 mi base for runway 15, ATC called us #2 for runway 19R following aircraft on right base. We were both watching for traffic. I spotted an aircraft (Z) which appeared to be on right base a few hundred ft AGL and 1/4-1/2 mi out. In hindsight, aircraft may have been on final for runway 15. I pointed out traffic to CFI and continued my approach and scan for other aircraft. Approximately 1 mi out, 1500 ft MSL, on/near final, I spotted an aircraft 25 ft right, 10 ft high, and slightly behind. I pitched down, banked left slightly to avoid as I pointed out traffic to CFI. We continued into a 360 degrees as I began a climb. CFI was initially unable to contact ATC. I heard go around from someone. ATC called us 'aircraft performing 360 degrees' (which was promptly replied) and instructed us to depart to west 1 mi and re-enter right base runway 19R. I complied and landed without further incident. Tower controller indicated in air (during 360 degrees) that we were to follow the other incident aircraft -- not particularly useful information at the time. Also, tower controller chastised us for use of 360 degrees because he had other traffic when he switched to ground. CFI responded with a few terse comments that we had to avoid other aircraft. Contributing factors: as a pilot unfamiliar with dpa traffic patterns, I could easily perceive an aircraft on final for runway 15 as a right base for runway 19R. If radio traffic was less and I was handling the radio, I may have been inclined to call negative traffic at some point. CFI commented before change of runways that I was on a 'perfect' left base for runway 15. From the position I was given runway 19, I was set up for a dog-leg to final which may not have provided the best visibility to see other aircraft established on a long final. Runway layout at dpa is not ideal for multiple landing and takeoff use. Runway (extensions) cross in the air which has to be more dangerous than on the ground. I would have preferred to 'stack up' in the pattern or use a shorter runway 19L over an approach to runway 15 which crosses runway 19R. Also, I understand that ATC has airport surveillance radar. Obviously, this wasn't effective in avoiding traffic conflict. There were no apparent TA's.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PA28 CHEROKEE PVT PLT WITH A CFI ONBOARD ON FINAL APCH FOR RWY 19R NARROWLY MISS ANOTHER PA28 ON SHORT FINAL TO RWY 19R AT DPA, IL.

Narrative: FLT ORIGINATED AT DPA AT XA00 AS A SIGHT-SEEING FLT AROUND CHICAGO. AS A 200 HR PVT PLT SEL, I CONTRACTED WITH LCL FBO FOR USE OF AN ARCHER AND A CFI. BEFORE STARTING ENG, I ESTABLISHED THAT CFI WAS PIC FOR THE FLT. I HAD NO PAPERS AND WAS NOT FULLY PREPARED TO ACT AS PIC FOR FLT IN UNFAMILIAR AREA. I HANDLED ALL CTLS FOR THE DURATION OF THE FLT AND CFI HANDLED RADIOS, GPS, AND COMS. UPON RETURN, INITIAL CALL TO DPA ATC WAS 7.5 MI NE. THE FREQ WAS FAIRLY BUSY PRIOR. ATC GAVE US L BASE RWY 15 RPT 2 MI. ANOTHER ACFT CALLED IN A FEW MINS LATER FROM THE N AND GIVEN SIMILAR INSTRUCTIONS. I DON'T RECALL THE SPECIFICS BUT REMEMBER THAT THIS TFC COULD BE A FACTOR AND SUSPECT THAT THIS WAS THE OTHER ACFT INVOLVED. WHEN RPTING 2 MI BASE FOR RWY 15, ATC CALLED US #2 FOR RWY 19R FOLLOWING ACFT ON R BASE. WE WERE BOTH WATCHING FOR TFC. I SPOTTED AN ACFT (Z) WHICH APPEARED TO BE ON R BASE A FEW HUNDRED FT AGL AND 1/4-1/2 MI OUT. IN HINDSIGHT, ACFT MAY HAVE BEEN ON FINAL FOR RWY 15. I POINTED OUT TFC TO CFI AND CONTINUED MY APCH AND SCAN FOR OTHER ACFT. APPROX 1 MI OUT, 1500 FT MSL, ON/NEAR FINAL, I SPOTTED AN ACFT 25 FT R, 10 FT HIGH, AND SLIGHTLY BEHIND. I PITCHED DOWN, BANKED L SLIGHTLY TO AVOID AS I POINTED OUT TFC TO CFI. WE CONTINUED INTO A 360 DEGS AS I BEGAN A CLB. CFI WAS INITIALLY UNABLE TO CONTACT ATC. I HEARD GAR FROM SOMEONE. ATC CALLED US 'ACFT PERFORMING 360 DEGS' (WHICH WAS PROMPTLY REPLIED) AND INSTRUCTED US TO DEPART TO W 1 MI AND RE-ENTER R BASE RWY 19R. I COMPLIED AND LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. TWR CTLR INDICATED IN AIR (DURING 360 DEGS) THAT WE WERE TO FOLLOW THE OTHER INCIDENT ACFT -- NOT PARTICULARLY USEFUL INFO AT THE TIME. ALSO, TWR CTLR CHASTISED US FOR USE OF 360 DEGS BECAUSE HE HAD OTHER TFC WHEN HE SWITCHED TO GND. CFI RESPONDED WITH A FEW TERSE COMMENTS THAT WE HAD TO AVOID OTHER ACFT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: AS A PLT UNFAMILIAR WITH DPA TFC PATTERNS, I COULD EASILY PERCEIVE AN ACFT ON FINAL FOR RWY 15 AS A R BASE FOR RWY 19R. IF RADIO TFC WAS LESS AND I WAS HANDLING THE RADIO, I MAY HAVE BEEN INCLINED TO CALL NEGATIVE TFC AT SOME POINT. CFI COMMENTED BEFORE CHANGE OF RWYS THAT I WAS ON A 'PERFECT' L BASE FOR RWY 15. FROM THE POS I WAS GIVEN RWY 19, I WAS SET UP FOR A DOG-LEG TO FINAL WHICH MAY NOT HAVE PROVIDED THE BEST VISIBILITY TO SEE OTHER ACFT ESTABLISHED ON A LONG FINAL. RWY LAYOUT AT DPA IS NOT IDEAL FOR MULTIPLE LNDG AND TKOF USE. RWY (EXTENSIONS) CROSS IN THE AIR WHICH HAS TO BE MORE DANGEROUS THAN ON THE GND. I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO 'STACK UP' IN THE PATTERN OR USE A SHORTER RWY 19L OVER AN APCH TO RWY 15 WHICH CROSSES RWY 19R. ALSO, I UNDERSTAND THAT ATC HAS ARPT SURVEILLANCE RADAR. OBVIOUSLY, THIS WASN'T EFFECTIVE IN AVOIDING TFC CONFLICT. THERE WERE NO APPARENT TA'S.

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.