General aviation pilot reported a NMAC with an aircraft that the Tower Controller cleared to a different runway. Pilot took evasive action to avoid a collision which caused them to lose altitude close to the ground.
Synopsis
General aviation pilot reported a NMAC with an aircraft that the Tower Controller cleared to a different runway. Pilot took evasive action to avoid a collision which caused them to lose altitude close to the ground.
Narrative
I was flying a Cessna 182 and conducting a VFR practice ILS approach into Runway XX at ZZZ Airport. ZZZ Approach cleared us for the approach and handed us off to the Tower. About three miles from the runway; I overheard a Cessna 172 in the pattern being cleared by the Tower to make right traffic for Runway XY. When I was approximately one mile from the runway; I heard the Tower Controller inform the 172 that it appeared to be making right traffic for Runway XZ (the reciprocal to XY); which placed it near the approach end of Runway XX. As the Tower Controller was issuing further instructions to the 172; I visually acquired the aircraft and noted that it was in a right bank and heading towards my approach path for Runway XX. Perceiving the 172 to be at approximately the same altitude as me and on a potential collision course; I took immediate evasive action by diving my aircraft to avoid a collision. This dive took me from approximately 500 feet MSL to approximately 350 feet MSL. Upon review of the ADS-B data; it appears there was only 200 feet of vertical separation at approximately half a mile horizontal distance when I initiated my dive. When the 172 was overtop of me; there was approximately 400 feet of vertical separation. Once clear of the conflict; I resumed my approach and made a normal landing on Runway XX. I believe the primary factors were a possible miscommunication or misunderstanding between the Tower Controller and the Cessna 172 pilot regarding which traffic pattern it should have been flying. A contributing factor could have been wind; according to the METAR for ZZZ; at XA:53 (this incident occurred at approximately XB:10) the wind was 290@15G21KT. The Tower Controller also stated that the wind direction was variable; and shifting between favoring Runway XX and Runway XY. To prevent a similar situation; I could have tried to visually acquire the 172 sooner; allowing me to take corrective action before a traffic conflict developed.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.