SMA X FOLLOWED WRONG ACFT IN TFC PATTERN HAD NMAC WITH LTT PROP ON FINAL APCH. BOTH ACFT EVASIVE ACTION TAKEN GAR. SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT. PLTDEV.
Synopsis
SMA X FOLLOWED WRONG ACFT IN TFC PATTERN HAD NMAC WITH LTT PROP ON FINAL APCH. BOTH ACFT EVASIVE ACTION TAKEN GAR. SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT. PLTDEV.
Narrative
WE WERE CONDUCTING TOUCH AND GOES IN SMT X ON RWY 17L AT APA L HAND TFC ON OUR FOURTH OR FIFTH LNDG WE WERE COMPLETING OUR TURN TO FINAL WHEN TWR ASKED US IF WE HAD LTT JET IN SIGHT; OUR REPLY WAS YES. TWR AT THAT TIME TOLD US TO FOLLOW THAT TFC BEING; THE LTT JET. (TFC THAT TWR WAS REFERRING TO WAS AN LTT ROP). AT THIS POINT WE INITIATED A GAR ON THE L SIDE OF THE RWY 17L AND TOLD TWR THAT WE WERE ALREADY ON FINAL AT THAT. WE WERE GOING AROUND ON THE L SIDE. TWR NEVER REPLIED BUT THE PLT OF LTT PROP SAID HE WAS GOING AROUND TO THE R AND THAT HE WAS ALMOST HIT. AFTER 10-15 SECONDS TWR TOLD US TO ENTER L XWIND AFTER PASSING TWR. THE SITUATION WAS AGGRAVATED BY THE FACT THAT WHEN WE RECEIVED TWR INSTRUCTIONS TO FOLLOW THE LTT JET WE HAD ALREADY TURNED INSIDE THE LTT PROP TO FINAL. THE LTT PROP WAS THUS TO THE W AND BEHIND US. AS A RESULT WE WERE UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH TWR INSTRUCTIONS TO FOLLOW THE LTT X AND THUS DECIDED TO AND TOLD THE TWR THAT WE WERE ALREADY ON FINAL AND GOING AROUND TO THE L. I CALLED TWR AFTER LNDG TO DISCUSS THE CONFLICT. THE SUPVR ON-DUTY WAS VERY UNCOOPERATIVE AND WOULD NOT LET ME SPEAK WITH THE CTLR. HE SAID 'THAT WE WERE TOLD TO FOLLOW TFC ON FINAL AND THAT WE WERE ON BASE NOT FINAL WHEN WE WERE GIVEN THOSE INSTRUCTIONS. I GAVE THEM MY SIDE OF THE STORY AND SAID THAT WE WERE ALREADY ON FINAL AND THAT'S WHY WE WENT AROUND.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.