MIL PLT EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH PROX OF OTHER ACFT IN VFR TFC PATTERN AT MCCONNEL AFB.

Narrative

I WAS FLYING THE ACFT ON RWY HEADING AT APPROX 2500 FT MSL AT MIDFIELD OVER RWY 1R WHEN MY COPLT REQUESTED A CLOSED VFR PATTERN FROM THE TWR. THE TWR CTLR CLRED US FOR THE CLOSED PATTERN FROM PRESENT POS. I BEGAN THE R TURN BEFORE THE END OF THE RWY AND WHILE IN THE TURN SPOTTED AN ACFT OFF MY NOSE AT AN ESTIMATED 2 MI. THE ACFT HAD A NOSE HIGH PITCH AND WAS CLBING. I CONTINUED MY CLOSED PATTERN AT 3000 FT. I WAS NOT ADVISED OF THIS TFC BY THE TWR; NOR WAS I AWARE OF THE LOCATION OF THE TFC UNTIL I SPOTTED THEM DURING MY TURNING MANEUVER. AFTER VISUALLY ACQUIRING THE OTHER ACFT; I DID NOT FEEL THAT I NEEDED TO TAKE ANY EVASIVE ACTION. IN ADDITION; THE ETCAS SYS ON OUR ACFT DID NOT GIVE A TA OR RA. IT DID NOT ADVISE OR DIRECT ANY INFO OR ACTION IN RESPONSE TO ANY TFC IN THE PATTERN; WHICH IS TO SAY THAT THE ACFT SYS DID NOT CONSIDER THE TFC A POTENTIAL HAZARD. THE OTHER ACFT WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE VFR PATTERN AT 3000 FT MSL ON THE DOWNWIND LEG; AND CLBED TO A HIGHER ALT ON THEIR OWN AFTER SEEING US TURNING TO DOWNWIND AT 3000 FT MSL. I BELIEVE THAT THE PLT OF THE OTHER ACFT FELT THAT THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT SEPARATION BTWN OUR 2 ACFT; SO HE MADE IT CLR TO THE TWR CTLR THAT HE PLANNED TO FILE A RPT ON THE EVENT. I BELIEVE THAT THE PROB AROSE DUE TO AIRSPACE CONGESTION; THERE WERE 4 ACFT IN THE VFR PATTERN; INCLUDING US AND THE OTHER TFC IN THE DISCUSSION; WHICH MAKES THE PATTERN VERY FULL. I BELIEVE THAT THE TWR SHOULD HAVE EXTENDED OUR UPWIND LEG TO FOLLOW BEHIND THE OTHER TFC ON DOWNWIND; RATHER THAN TRY TO 'SQUEEZE' US IN FRONT OF THE DOWNWIND TFC. HOWEVER; AFTER SPEAKING TO A TWR SUPVR AFTER THE EVENT; I CAME TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY USE 500 FT SEPARATION AS 'WELL CLR' FOR THE CLASS D AIRSPACE IN THE VFR PATTERN. THE SUPVR TOLD ME THAT THE RADAR DATA INDICATED THAT WE WERE SEPARATED BY 2 MI.