Narrative:

While inbound VFR for landing at btr; about 15-20 mi out; the btr approach controller advised that we were #2 behind a crj which was on a straight-in final for runway 13. We were given a 090 degree vector for sequencing for runway 13; in effect a 40 degree right base leg for runway 13. We were about 1500 ft; with an uneven cloud deck above us at about 2000-2500 ft. After a few moments we spotted what appeared to be the crj in and out of the clouds to our left; with the airport to our right. I checked 2 or 3 times to get a feel for the relative motion of the other aircraft. The crj appeared to be descending; its airspeed appeared greater than ours; and its line of flight appeared to be converging with ours. My estimate was that our paths would meet in about 15-20 seconds. Due to its position in and out of the cloud base; my belief was that the crj could not see our aircraft. As I was about to key the microphone to request a left turn to 310 degrees to avoid the other aircraft (from my vantage point; it appeared that a left turn to 310 degrees would put us into a 'downwind' position relative to the crj's 'final' approach path of 130); an aircraft called the controller and the controller then advised us instead to turn right 20 degrees to heading 110 degrees. We were still 10-20 mi from the airport. It appeared the controller's 110 degree heading would place our aircraft more directly into the flight path of the crj; which is a faster aircraft than my beech sierra. Additionally; it would have positioned us such that the faster crj would have been behind us and slightly above us. We would rapidly be under the nose of the descending crj; and once we turned right; we would no longer have been able to see the crj in order to avoid it. So there we were. I could see the crj; the crj couldn't see me. The controller's vector appeared to be placing us into the path of the faster crj; with the vector at the same time removing our ability to see and avoid the other aircraft. I considered this to be an emergency. As I began complying with the controller's right turn vector to 110 degrees; I advised the approach controller of the above; probably very cryptically; and I advised that we were reversing course to 270 degrees in order to get out of the flight path of the crj. I believe the controller understood our message. What I heard was the controller saying 'understand turning to heading of 270.' after we completed the turn; the approach controller advised that we should not have taken the action we did; saying 'you should not have done that.' I apologized; and was given a new vector for the sequence. In hindsight; if the controller was on top of things; I should have simply complied with his original vectors and relied on his expertise to avoid a midair collision. I have communicated with this controller before; he is always professional and sounds like one of the more experienced controllers at btr. On the other hand; if the controller had been on top of things; and if I was #2 for landing; then why was I given a vector which had me crossing in front of the faster crj? I believe that my temporary loss of confidence in the controller's attention to the situation was the source of my taking emergency action to avoid a collision with the approaching crj. Perhaps the controller would have kept our 2 aircraft separated; and perhaps it would have been safer if I had simply complied with the controller's vector. I do not know if my evasive action made things better or worse. I am concerned that my evasive action to avoid a collision might have inadvertently increased the risk to my passenger and to the other aircraft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: VFR BE24 ON VECTORS FROM BTR APCH; TO FOLLOW CRJ ON FINAL; ELECTS NOT TO COMPLY WITH CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS BASED UPON PLT'S SPACING JUDGEMENT.

Narrative: WHILE INBOUND VFR FOR LNDG AT BTR; ABOUT 15-20 MI OUT; THE BTR APCH CTLR ADVISED THAT WE WERE #2 BEHIND A CRJ WHICH WAS ON A STRAIGHT-IN FINAL FOR RWY 13. WE WERE GIVEN A 090 DEG VECTOR FOR SEQUENCING FOR RWY 13; IN EFFECT A 40 DEG R BASE LEG FOR RWY 13. WE WERE ABOUT 1500 FT; WITH AN UNEVEN CLOUD DECK ABOVE US AT ABOUT 2000-2500 FT. AFTER A FEW MOMENTS WE SPOTTED WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE CRJ IN AND OUT OF THE CLOUDS TO OUR L; WITH THE ARPT TO OUR R. I CHKED 2 OR 3 TIMES TO GET A FEEL FOR THE RELATIVE MOTION OF THE OTHER ACFT. THE CRJ APPEARED TO BE DSNDING; ITS AIRSPD APPEARED GREATER THAN OURS; AND ITS LINE OF FLT APPEARED TO BE CONVERGING WITH OURS. MY ESTIMATE WAS THAT OUR PATHS WOULD MEET IN ABOUT 15-20 SECONDS. DUE TO ITS POS IN AND OUT OF THE CLOUD BASE; MY BELIEF WAS THAT THE CRJ COULD NOT SEE OUR ACFT. AS I WAS ABOUT TO KEY THE MIKE TO REQUEST A L TURN TO 310 DEGS TO AVOID THE OTHER ACFT (FROM MY VANTAGE POINT; IT APPEARED THAT A L TURN TO 310 DEGS WOULD PUT US INTO A 'DOWNWIND' POS RELATIVE TO THE CRJ'S 'FINAL' APCH PATH OF 130); AN ACFT CALLED THE CTLR AND THE CTLR THEN ADVISED US INSTEAD TO TURN R 20 DEGS TO HDG 110 DEGS. WE WERE STILL 10-20 MI FROM THE ARPT. IT APPEARED THE CTLR'S 110 DEG HDG WOULD PLACE OUR ACFT MORE DIRECTLY INTO THE FLT PATH OF THE CRJ; WHICH IS A FASTER ACFT THAN MY BEECH SIERRA. ADDITIONALLY; IT WOULD HAVE POSITIONED US SUCH THAT THE FASTER CRJ WOULD HAVE BEEN BEHIND US AND SLIGHTLY ABOVE US. WE WOULD RAPIDLY BE UNDER THE NOSE OF THE DSNDING CRJ; AND ONCE WE TURNED R; WE WOULD NO LONGER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE CRJ IN ORDER TO AVOID IT. SO THERE WE WERE. I COULD SEE THE CRJ; THE CRJ COULDN'T SEE ME. THE CTLR'S VECTOR APPEARED TO BE PLACING US INTO THE PATH OF THE FASTER CRJ; WITH THE VECTOR AT THE SAME TIME REMOVING OUR ABILITY TO SEE AND AVOID THE OTHER ACFT. I CONSIDERED THIS TO BE AN EMER. AS I BEGAN COMPLYING WITH THE CTLR'S R TURN VECTOR TO 110 DEGS; I ADVISED THE APCH CTLR OF THE ABOVE; PROBABLY VERY CRYPTICALLY; AND I ADVISED THAT WE WERE REVERSING COURSE TO 270 DEGS IN ORDER TO GET OUT OF THE FLT PATH OF THE CRJ. I BELIEVE THE CTLR UNDERSTOOD OUR MESSAGE. WHAT I HEARD WAS THE CTLR SAYING 'UNDERSTAND TURNING TO HDG OF 270.' AFTER WE COMPLETED THE TURN; THE APCH CTLR ADVISED THAT WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN THE ACTION WE DID; SAYING 'YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE THAT.' I APOLOGIZED; AND WAS GIVEN A NEW VECTOR FOR THE SEQUENCE. IN HINDSIGHT; IF THE CTLR WAS ON TOP OF THINGS; I SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY COMPLIED WITH HIS ORIGINAL VECTORS AND RELIED ON HIS EXPERTISE TO AVOID A MIDAIR COLLISION. I HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH THIS CTLR BEFORE; HE IS ALWAYS PROFESSIONAL AND SOUNDS LIKE ONE OF THE MORE EXPERIENCED CTLRS AT BTR. ON THE OTHER HAND; IF THE CTLR HAD BEEN ON TOP OF THINGS; AND IF I WAS #2 FOR LNDG; THEN WHY WAS I GIVEN A VECTOR WHICH HAD ME XING IN FRONT OF THE FASTER CRJ? I BELIEVE THAT MY TEMPORARY LOSS OF CONFIDENCE IN THE CTLR'S ATTN TO THE SITUATION WAS THE SOURCE OF MY TAKING EMER ACTION TO AVOID A COLLISION WITH THE APCHING CRJ. PERHAPS THE CTLR WOULD HAVE KEPT OUR 2 ACFT SEPARATED; AND PERHAPS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SAFER IF I HAD SIMPLY COMPLIED WITH THE CTLR'S VECTOR. I DO NOT KNOW IF MY EVASIVE ACTION MADE THINGS BETTER OR WORSE. I AM CONCERNED THAT MY EVASIVE ACTION TO AVOID A COLLISION MIGHT HAVE INADVERTENTLY INCREASED THE RISK TO MY PAX AND TO THE OTHER ACFT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.