Flight Instructor and student reported an NMAC in the traffic pattern at a non-towered airport. The other aircraft overflew the instructor's aircraft requiring evasive action to avoid a collision.
Synopsis
Flight Instructor and student reported an NMAC in the traffic pattern at a non-towered airport. The other aircraft overflew the instructor's aircraft requiring evasive action to avoid a collision.
Narrative
Background:My student and I were set up for left downwind Runway XX just about to turn base when we were overtaken on the downwind by an aircraft 100 ft. above us. I noticed their position on TCAS was moving significantly faster than we were as they entered the pattern. When they called entering the 45 to the downwind. I noticed this; I made a radio call to the 'aircraft on downwind' to say if they had us in sight. Their reply was delayed. Then; there was another radio call (unfortunately I cannot recall who the call was from; but there was a question on if someone had intentions to land). PA28 confirmed they had us in sight; however at that point our TCAS sounded for an aircraft same position and 100 ft. above us. At this point; I still did not have the aircraft insight and began to consider their previous call was potentially for another aircraft in the pattern as there were several. My concern was for my student and I's safety. My follow on thought was the PA28 (low wing aircraft) did not have our aircraft insight directly below them. I made another radio call requesting for the PA28 to state if they intended to land Runway XX. There was no response. After enough time passed without a reply; I took control of the aircraft and I made a judgement call to break off the approach and turn out of the pattern to the southwest to avoid a potential midair collision. What caused the Problem: Human Performance I firmly believe what caused the issue was the PA28's decision to enter the pattern with excessive airspeed while not giving aircraft in front of them (and below them) the proper spacing as they have the right of way.What can prevent a recurrence:Pilot of the PA28 to allow traffic in front of them the proper spacing and separation. If they are approaching another ac in the traffic pattern then adjust spacing. Consider making a right or left 360 where appropriate or wait outside the pattern until there is sufficient spacing before entering. Make appropriate radio calls and answer questions when asked on a non towered frequency especially when there is a concern for positioning. Review AC90-66C
Second reporter narrative
My instructor and I were setting up to land at Runway XX when another aircraft called that they had entered the downwind. They did not yet acknowledge another aircraft was in the pattern; and continued to close the distance. We made multiple attempts to communicate but the pilot was delayed in all radio responses and gave no communication other than that he had us in sight. As there were multiple aircraft in the pattern we could not guarantee he was referring to us. When it was appropriate to turn base; TCAS now showed him 100 feet and on top of our aircraft; still not communicating his intentions or stating his own. As we could not see him; my instructor broke off to the right to do a 360 and re-enter the pattern.After landing; we were able to find the pilot and ask what his intentions were. The pilot claimed he did nothing wrong; and that we should have trusted that he did have us in sight despite giving no further descriptors in a busy traffic pattern; and been able to predict he was planning to extend his downwind without him communicating. The pilot claimed Air Traffic Control 'often' controls aircraft with no horizontal separation and less than 200 ft of vertical separation. The pilot insisted it was more than 200 ft; despite TCAS showing him co-altitude and he grew increasingly defensive; accusing us of calling his experience into question instead of explaining his perspective and finding a common ground.This pilot displayed blatant disregard for other aircraft; refused to give way to the lower; slower; and first aircraft; struggled with basic radio communication; and refused to take any responsibility in what was displayed on our system; a near miss scenario.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.