|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : oxc|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 100|
msl bound upper : 100
|Operator||general aviation : instructional|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear|
|Flight Phase||climbout : initial|
climbout : takeoff
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
|Function||observation : observer|
|Qualification||pilot : cfi|
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 100|
flight time total : 1000
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Anomaly||conflict : nmac|
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||flight crew : took evasive action|
|Miss Distance||horizontal : 1000|
vertical : 150
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Airport||procedure or policy : unspecified|
In between students I was watching local traffic at oxc. As is customary, even though runway 18 was active, people were practicing the ILS 36 approach. I observed an small aircraft X taking off runway 18. At the same time an small aircraft Y following the ILS 36 on a 1/4 mi final. The small aircraft Y appeared to be continuing for landing. At approximately 100' AGL both aircraft appeared to notice each other and took evasive action. It appears that permitting converging approachs to minimums at uncontrolled fields will eventually lead to more midairs (eg, san luis obispo several yrs ago). As an instrument I feel more vulnerable to this situation because of my continuous use of uncontrolled air fields. Pilot education and enforcement should stress safety at uncontrolled fields. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter expressed great concern about the frequency of this near midair collision situation. He is a flight instrument and feels students in training have enough to consider west/O this dangerous situation of head on traffic. Feels aim or far's should be specific about limits for practice approachs at uncontrolled airports.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: NMAC AT UNCONTROLLED ARPT INVOLVING ILS APCHS AND OPPOSITE DIRECTION RWY IN USE.
Narrative: IN BTWN STUDENTS I WAS WATCHING LCL TFC AT OXC. AS IS CUSTOMARY, EVEN THOUGH RWY 18 WAS ACTIVE, PEOPLE WERE PRACTICING THE ILS 36 APCH. I OBSERVED AN SMA X TAKING OFF RWY 18. AT THE SAME TIME AN SMA Y FOLLOWING THE ILS 36 ON A 1/4 MI FINAL. THE SMA Y APPEARED TO BE CONTINUING FOR LNDG. AT APPROX 100' AGL BOTH ACFT APPEARED TO NOTICE EACH OTHER AND TOOK EVASIVE ACTION. IT APPEARS THAT PERMITTING CONVERGING APCHS TO MINIMUMS AT UNCTLED FIELDS WILL EVENTUALLY LEAD TO MORE MIDAIRS (EG, SAN LUIS OBISPO SEVERAL YRS AGO). AS AN INSTR I FEEL MORE VULNERABLE TO THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OF MY CONTINUOUS USE OF UNCTLED AIR FIELDS. PLT EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT SHOULD STRESS SAFETY AT UNCTLED FIELDS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR EXPRESSED GREAT CONCERN ABOUT THE FREQ OF THIS NMAC SITUATION. HE IS A FLT INSTR AND FEELS STUDENTS IN TRNING HAVE ENOUGH TO CONSIDER W/O THIS DANGEROUS SITUATION OF HEAD ON TFC. FEELS AIM OR FAR'S SHOULD BE SPECIFIC ABOUT LIMITS FOR PRACTICE APCHS AT UNCTLED ARPTS.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.