NMAC BTWN A STINSON 108 ON INITIAL CLB AFTER TKOF AND A C152 ALSO ON INITIAL CLBOUT FROM THE OPPOSITE END OF THE RWY. THE RPTR MOVED OVER TO THE R SIDE OF THE RWY TO LET THE OTHER ACFT BY.

Date: 2001-05 · Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear · Phase: takeoff

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-other-unknown|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far

Synopsis

NMAC BTWN A STINSON 108 ON INITIAL CLB AFTER TKOF AND A C152 ALSO ON INITIAL CLBOUT FROM THE OPPOSITE END OF THE RWY. THE RPTR MOVED OVER TO THE R SIDE OF THE RWY TO LET THE OTHER ACFT BY.

Narrative

THE WINDS AND TFC DETERMINED THAT I USE RWY 16 FOR TKOF. DURING MY TAXI FROM THE TRANSIENT PARKING AREA NEAR THE RESTAURANT; I FOLLOWED A C152 TO THE MAIN TXWY. BEFORE HE EXITED THE PARKING RAMP (BEFORE HE EVEN PASSED ME IN THE TRANSIENT PARKING AREA) HE DID COMMUNICATE THAT HE WAS TAXIING TO RWY 34. I CONTINUED MY TAXI TO RWY 16; MAKING A MENTAL NOTE THAT HE WOULD BE USING THE OPPOSING RWY. CONSIDERING THE WINDS AND TFC I THOUGHT THAT ODD. I COMPLETED MY RUN-UP AND BEFORE ROLLING TO THE HOLD SHORT LINE; I COMMUNICATED THAT I WAS ROLLING FROM THE RUN-UP AREA FOR TKOF ON RWY 16. AFTER STOPPING AT THE HOLD SHORT LINE TO MAKE ANOTHER VISUAL CHK FOR TFC; I COMMUNICATED A SECOND TIME THAT I WAS NOW ROLLING ONTO RWY 16 FOR TKOF. AS THERE WAS NO OTHER COMS IN REPLY; AND I DID NOT SEE ANY TFC; I PROCEEDED ONTO THE RWY AND BEGAN MY TKOF ROLL. HERE IS WHERE THE STORY BECOMES MORE INTERESTING. APPROX 2/3 OF THE WAY THROUGH MY TKOF ROLL; I BEGAN TO DISTINGUISH WING STROBES (OR SUNLIGHT GLINTING) AT THE FAR END OF THE RWY. AT THIS TIME; I WAS FAR CLOSER TO TAKING FLT AND CLRING THE RWY THAN I WAS TO SAFELY STOPPING TO CLR THE RWY; SO I DROPPED 15 DEGS OF FLAPS; LIFTED OFF AS QUICKLY AS MY AIRSPD WOULD ALLOW AND CLRED THE RWY TO THE R. AS I WAS DOING THIS; I COMMUNICATED THAT I WAS EXPEDITING MY TKOF AND CLRING RWY 16 TO THE R. AS I CLRED THE RWY; THE CESSNA IN QUESTION CLRED MY L WING BY APPROX 40 FT AND STILL WITH ZERO COM. UPON LEAVING THE PATTERN AND HDG FOR RENO; I LISTENED INTENTLY TO THE RADIO TFC AT MINDEN. THERE WAS A FIRE BOMBER THAT WAS ON THE RUN-UP RAMP THE SAME TIME AS I WAS. THE TANKER CREW WAS ASKING REPEATEDLY THAT THE CESSNA PLEASE EXTEND ITS PATTERN AND ALLOW THEM TO LEAVE AS THEY WERE RESPONDING TO A FIRE NEAR PYRAMID LAKE. AFTER ATTEMPTING TO GET A RESPONSE 3 SEPARATE TIMES; THEY FINALLY JUST ANNOUNCED THEY WERE TAKING OFF ON RWY 16; AND DID SO. AFTER TKOF; THEY ASKED THAT THE CESSNA PLEASE COMMUNICATE AND IN RESPONSE THE PLT OF THE CESSNA WAS; IN MY OPINION; UNPROFESSIONAL TO THE EXTREME. BY COMMUNICATING WITH OTHER ACFT BEFORE TKOF; I KNOW THAT MY RADIO WAS XMITTING CORRECTLY. AFTER FINDING OUT THAT THE PLT OF THE CESSNA WAS A LCL INSTRUCTOR; INSTRUCTING A NEW STUDENT; I WAS SHOCKED. I AM EXTREMELY APPALLED THAT AN INSTRUCTOR ACTED IN SUCH A WAY AS THAT WHILE FLYING AN ACFT. ESPECIALLY WHILE TEACHING A STUDENT PLT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FLT AND SAFETY. THE THOUGHT OF FLYING IN THE SAME AIRSPACE AS ONE OF HIS STUDENTS; MUCH LESS HIM; SCARES THE HELL OUT OF ME. THE PLT IN QUESTION HAS A REPUTATION ON THE FIELD FOR FLYING AS THOUGH 'HE OWNS THE ARPT.' THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME SOMEONE HAS EXPERIENCED A SAFETY ISSUE WITH THE PLT OF THE CESSNA. THIS INCIDENT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED HAD THE CESSNA PLT COMMUNICATED HIS INTENTIONS. IT COULD HAVE ALSO BEEN AVOIDED HAD HE CHOSEN TO USE THE PREFERRED RWY AT THE TIME. THERE ALSO SEEMS TO BE THE ADDITIONAL COMPLICATION OF A POOR ATTITUDE IN REGARD TO SAFETY AND COURTESY.

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