NMAC - 2 PLTS HAVE A NMAC AT AN UNCTLED ARPT.

Date: 1995-04 · Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer

Anomalies: conflict-nmac|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-other-unknown|other-unspecified

Synopsis

NMAC - 2 PLTS HAVE A NMAC AT AN UNCTLED ARPT.

Narrative

WE WERE INBOUND TO SOLDOTNA ARPT FROM ANCHORAGE INTL (FROM THE N). AT APPROX 20 NM N WE MONITORED FREQ 122.5 TO GET A TFC PICTURE. ALSO; WHILE DOING THIS; WE MONITORED THE AWOS ON 135.45 WHICH RPTED THE WIND OF APPROX 330 DEGS AT 10 KTS (A DIRECT XWIND TO RWY 25). WE HEARD A PIPER RPT ENTERING L TFC FOR RWY 25. WE RPTED 10 NM N PLANNING L TFC RWY 25 AT SOLDOTNA. THEN WE HEARD THE PIPER CALL FINAL FOR RWY 25. WE SLOWED AND REMAINED AT 1200 FT MSL. WE CALLED ON THE CTAF (122.5) THAT WE WERE 4 NM N PLANNING RWY 25 AT SOLDOTNA. WHEN WE WERE APPROX 2 MI N; A SINGLE ENG CESSNA RPTED 4 MI N PLANNING R TFC FOR RWY 7 AT SOLDOTNA. WE ASSUMED THE SINGLE ENG CESSNA WAS BEHIND US AND WE RPTED OVERHEAD THE ARPT FOR RWY 25 SOLDOTNA. SHORTLY THEREAFTER; THE SINGLE ENG CESSNA CALLED TO TELL US THAT WE HAD JUST FLOWN OVER HIM AT APPROX 100 FT. WE NEVER SAW THE OTHER TFC. ALSO; THE SINGLE ENG CESSNA CALLED THAT THEY WERE AT 600 FT WHEN THEY CALLED 4 MI N (WE WERE 2 MI N AT THAT TIME). WE CONTINUED LNDG ON RWY 25; MAKING L TFC. THE SINGLE ENG CESSNA CIRCLED AND MADE R TFC FOR RWY 07 AT SOLDOTNA. I'M NOT SURE THAT WE COULD DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY. WE SLOWED EARLY; WE REMAINED AT 1200 FT MSL (WHICH IS APPROX 1100 FT ABOVE THE ARPT; WHICH IS 107 FT MSL); WE MADE ALL OF THE NECESSARY CALLS; HAD A GOOD PICTURE (MENTALLY) OF WHERE THE OTHER TFC SAID THEY WERE; I NEVER CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE OTHER TFC'S POS CALLS COULD BE SO FAR OFF. FORTUNATELY; WE MISSED BY APPROX 100 FT; I WOULD HAVE MUCH PREFERRED TO HAVE SIGHTED THE OTHER ACFT (WHICH WE NEVER DID UNTIL OUR L BASE THEN HE WAS R DOWNWIND). THE AWOS RPTED THE ALTIMETER AS 29.66 WHICH WE WERE USING; THE OTHER TFC CALLED THAT THEY WERE AT '600 FT.' WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN 600 FT APART??? EVEN IF THE OTHER TFC MEANT THEY WERE 600 FT AGL WE SHOULD HAVE HAD 500 FT BTWN US. I SUSPECT THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS NOT USING THE CURRENT ALTIMETER SETTING. OF COURSE I WAS PARTIALLY AT FAULT FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE THIS OTHER ACFT WHICH WAS AHEAD AND LOWER.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.