Narrative:

The aircraft owner was at the controls of the C182 (aircraft #1); as we were proceeding to long beach on the final leg of the flight. The flight continued westward toward the pdz VOR on victor 370 (pdz 079 degree radial). After passing palm springs and clearing banning pass; I suddenly spotted a light twin (aircraft #2) approaching directly head-on and at our altitude. Instantly; I took the controls and banked sharply to the right; avoiding a sudden crunch of colliding aircraft! Over my shoulder; I observed the underside of the twin as it flashed by; about 50-60 ft away. The pilot of the twin engine aircraft (aircraft #2) obviously reacted as I had; and we were able to continue on our separate courses. Shortly after the near miss incident; we received a 'traffic alert at 12 O'clock position' from the controller. Aircraft #1 was in VFR flight conditions (visibility 10 mi or better) at 3500 ft altitude; in positive radar contact with march approach control; a standard 'VFR flight following' procedure. The #2 aircraft was probably not in contact with the ATC system. The 'irony' of the situation; or question to be asked is: why did the ATC controller give us a traffic alert call after the fact; when the twin was behind and past us? The location of this incident was approximately 22 NM east of the pdz VOR; on the pdz 079 degree radial (near seter intersection). Comments: 1) both aircraft were operating legally VFR in class east airspace; altitude and course. (In the relevant vicinity; the 'hemispheric' rule is not applicable at 3500 ft MSL -- terrain approximately 1500 ft). 2) aircraft #1 was in positive contact with the appropriate ATC agency. 3) there was no indication that aircraft #2 was in contact with march approach control. And it is not certain that #2's transponder was functioning; with or without mode C. 4) the after-the-fact TA to aircraft #1 leaves a disturbing question to be addressed; if it was referring to aircraft #2. On the other hand; in the urgency of the moment; the advisory might have been misinterped by the undersigned. Recommendation: in no case should any pilot relax from heads-up flying and situational awareness when flying in VMC. Beware of glass cockpits and 'unnoticed airborne obstacles.'

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C182 PILOT HAS NMAC WITH LIGHT TWIN AT 3500 FEET EAST OF PDZ VOR.

Narrative: THE ACFT OWNER WAS AT THE CTLS OF THE C182 (ACFT #1); AS WE WERE PROCEEDING TO LONG BEACH ON THE FINAL LEG OF THE FLT. THE FLT CONTINUED WESTWARD TOWARD THE PDZ VOR ON VICTOR 370 (PDZ 079 DEG RADIAL). AFTER PASSING PALM SPRINGS AND CLRING BANNING PASS; I SUDDENLY SPOTTED A LIGHT TWIN (ACFT #2) APCHING DIRECTLY HEAD-ON AND AT OUR ALT. INSTANTLY; I TOOK THE CTLS AND BANKED SHARPLY TO THE R; AVOIDING A SUDDEN CRUNCH OF COLLIDING ACFT! OVER MY SHOULDER; I OBSERVED THE UNDERSIDE OF THE TWIN AS IT FLASHED BY; ABOUT 50-60 FT AWAY. THE PLT OF THE TWIN ENG ACFT (ACFT #2) OBVIOUSLY REACTED AS I HAD; AND WE WERE ABLE TO CONTINUE ON OUR SEPARATE COURSES. SHORTLY AFTER THE NEAR MISS INCIDENT; WE RECEIVED A 'TFC ALERT AT 12 O'CLOCK POS' FROM THE CTLR. ACFT #1 WAS IN VFR FLT CONDITIONS (VISIBILITY 10 MI OR BETTER) AT 3500 FT ALT; IN POSITIVE RADAR CONTACT WITH MARCH APCH CTL; A STANDARD 'VFR FLT FOLLOWING' PROC. THE #2 ACFT WAS PROBABLY NOT IN CONTACT WITH THE ATC SYS. THE 'IRONY' OF THE SITUATION; OR QUESTION TO BE ASKED IS: WHY DID THE ATC CTLR GIVE US A TFC ALERT CALL AFTER THE FACT; WHEN THE TWIN WAS BEHIND AND PAST US? THE LOCATION OF THIS INCIDENT WAS APPROX 22 NM E OF THE PDZ VOR; ON THE PDZ 079 DEG RADIAL (NEAR SETER INTXN). COMMENTS: 1) BOTH ACFT WERE OPERATING LEGALLY VFR IN CLASS E AIRSPACE; ALT AND COURSE. (IN THE RELEVANT VICINITY; THE 'HEMISPHERIC' RULE IS NOT APPLICABLE AT 3500 FT MSL -- TERRAIN APPROX 1500 FT). 2) ACFT #1 WAS IN POSITIVE CONTACT WITH THE APPROPRIATE ATC AGENCY. 3) THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT ACFT #2 WAS IN CONTACT WITH MARCH APCH CTL. AND IT IS NOT CERTAIN THAT #2'S XPONDER WAS FUNCTIONING; WITH OR WITHOUT MODE C. 4) THE AFTER-THE-FACT TA TO ACFT #1 LEAVES A DISTURBING QUESTION TO BE ADDRESSED; IF IT WAS REFERRING TO ACFT #2. ON THE OTHER HAND; IN THE URGENCY OF THE MOMENT; THE ADVISORY MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISINTERPED BY THE UNDERSIGNED. RECOMMENDATION: IN NO CASE SHOULD ANY PLT RELAX FROM HEADS-UP FLYING AND SITUATIONAL AWARENESS WHEN FLYING IN VMC. BEWARE OF GLASS COCKPITS AND 'UNNOTICED AIRBORNE OBSTACLES.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.