DURING A FLT CHK IN A BE76; A PLT EXAMINER RPTS MISSING A CESSNA BY 50 FT. THE CESSNA HAD BEEN TOLD BY THE ATCT LCL CTLR TO MAKE A R 360 DEG TURN FOR SPACING WITH THE BE76 ON AN ILS APCH TO THE SAME RWY. AN ARGUMENT BTWN THE FLC AND ATC ENSUED.
Synopsis
DURING A FLT CHK IN A BE76; A PLT EXAMINER RPTS MISSING A CESSNA BY 50 FT. THE CESSNA HAD BEEN TOLD BY THE ATCT LCL CTLR TO MAKE A R 360 DEG TURN FOR SPACING WITH THE BE76 ON AN ILS APCH TO THE SAME RWY. AN ARGUMENT BTWN THE FLC AND ATC ENSUED.
Narrative
YESTERDAY; NEAR THE COMPLETION OF A FLT CHK; I HAD AN INTERESTING EXCHANGE WITH MYF TWR LCL CTLR. FIRST THE CIRCUMSTANCES: WE (THE APPLICANT AND MYSELF) WERE COMPLETING A MEL ADD-ON TO HIS COMMERCIAL CERTIFICATE BY WINDING UP ON AN ILS RWY 28R APCH TO MYF. THE APPLICANT WAS WEARING A HOOD AND THE ACFT A BE76. WE HAD JUST BEEN HANDED OFF BY APCH CTL AND UPON CHKING IN WITH THE TWR WERE ADVISED THAT WE HAD TFC AT OUR 11 O'CLOCK (I CAN'T REMEMBER THE RANGE OR DISTANCE) AND THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS LOWER AND INBOUND FOR RWY 28R. THE OTHER ACFT (A CESSNA) WAS ISSUED A SIMILAR CALLOUT. IN BOTH CASES IT WAS RPTED THAT THE OTHER TFC WAS 'NOT IN SIGHT' OR 'LOOKING.' OUR APPROX POS WAS LAKE MURRAY ON THE GS AND ABOUT 2500 FT MSL. THE CESSNA WAS ISSUED A CLRNC TO MAKE A 'R' 360 DEG TURN TO BE SEQUENCED BEHIND US IN THE DUCHESS. WITH THAT; BOTH THE APPLICANT AND MYSELF INCREASED OUR SEARCH FOR THE TFC KNOWING THE POSSIBILITY OF THAT OTHER ACFT XING OUR FLT PATH. MOMENTS LATER THE APPLICANT; OUT OF THE PERIPHERY OF HIS VISION; GLIMPSED THE CESSNA APPEAR BTWN THE L ENG NACELLE AND FUSELAGE WITH AN EXPLETIVE FOLLOWED BY MY SIGHTING BTWN THE FUSELAGE AND THE R NACELLE WITH A SIMILAR REMARK BY ME. WE PASSED WITHIN 50 FT AS THE OTHER ACFT CONTINUED HIS R TURN. WE WERE ABOUT TO CROSS THE OM. SEEING THAT WE HAD A 'VERY NEAR-MISS' (AS YOU CAN IMAGINE I WAS QUITE SHAKEN); I POINTED OUT TO THE TWR THAT WE HAD MISSED THAT CESSNA BY ABOUT 50 FT AND SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS NEXT TIME THE CTLR MIGHT CONSIDER HAVING THE OTHER ACFT MAKE A 'L' TURN. I WAS ASKED TO REPEAT -- WHICH I DID. THE CTLR THEN ASKED IF I WAS READY TO COPY HER PHONE NUMBER SO SHE COULD BE CONSULTED WHEN WE GOT ON THE GND. I ADVISED HER THAT WE WOULD CONTACT HER AFTER WE GOT ON GND CTL; WHICH I DID ONCE WE CLRED THE RWY BY MEANS OF MY PORTABLE CELLULAR PHONE. THE MALE VOICE ON THE PHONE BEGAN PREACHING ABOUT PROFESSIONALISM AND SUGGESTED THAT I KEEP MY COMMENTS OFF THE FREQ AND USE THE PHONE FOR SUCH REMARKS. UNABLE TO GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE; I LISTENED TO HIS CONTINUED BERATING AND WHEN ASKED IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS; MY REPLY WAS 'NO.' SEE AND AVOID RULES APPLY IN VMC. WE DIDN'T SEE EACH OTHER; A FACT THE TWR WAS AWARE OF (INCIDENTLY WE WERE ON AN IFR CLRNC). MYF TWR IS NOT A RADAR FACILITY. THE CTLRS DO; HOWEVER; USE THEIR REPEATER TO ADVISE AND OFTEN RECOMMEND HDG AND/OR ALT CHANGES TO AVOID OTHER TFC. A 'R' 360 DEG TURN TO SEQUENCE AN ACFT BEHIND KNOWINGLY TO CROSS IN FRONT OF (OR VERY NEAR) THE TFC IT IS TO FOLLOW DEFIES LOGIC -- PARTICULARLY WHEN NEITHER ACFT HAS VISUAL CONTACT. IT IS MY OPINION THE COMMENTS BY ME ON THE RADIO WERE APPROPRIATE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I WAS SHAKEN; UPSET AND ANGRY AT WHAT AMOUNTED TO AN ATTEMPT ON MY LIFE. I DID; HOWEVER; IN ATTEMPTING TO GET IN A WORD IN EDGEWISE LATER ON THE PHONE; USE AN EXPLETIVE. THIS IS MY ONLY REGRET CONCERNING THIS INCIDENT.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.