INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT PRACTICING SHORT FIELD TKOFS AND LNDGS ABOARD C152 EXPERIENCE NMAC WITH CESSNA SHOOTING A SIMULATED IFR APCH OPPOSITE DIRECTION TO THEIR TKOF RWY.

Narrative

INSTRUCTING C152 STUDENT ON TFC PATTERNS OPS AT GAI. STUDENT'S FIRST EXPERIENCE OF GAI. OPERATING NEAR MGTOW IN HOT VMC; SO USING SHORT FIELD TKOF TECHNIQUE TO MAXIMIZE ALT DURING INITIAL CLB. TURNING R TO 340 DEGS AT 750 FT MSL (200 FT AGL) TO CONFORM TO GAI 32 NOISE ABATEMENT DIRECTIONS. THIRD TKOF AFTER TOUCH-AND-GOES. HAD PREVIOUSLY WARNED STUDENT TO LOWER NOSE AT 900-1000 FT MSL TO CHK FOR TFC INBOUND ON VOR 14 OR GPS 14 APCHS FROM FDK DIRECTION; ALSO FOR TFC JOINING TFC PATTERN FROM NW ON EARLY DOWNWIND; OR FROM N ON 45-DEG JOIN. SOME MINS EARLIER; HAD HEARD ACFT Y CALL SEVERAL MI OUT ON VOR 14 APCH. USED THAT CALL AS EXAMPLE TO STUDENT OF NMAC RISK FROM ACFT APCHING GAI FROM NW; IN OPPOSITE DIRECTION TO RWY 32 TKOF TFC. HAD LISTENED FOR FURTHER CALLS FROM ACFT Y APCHING GAI; NOTHING HEARD. STUDENT WAS CLBING ON 340-HDG AT 900 FT MSL. I SAW CESSNA ACFT OVER STUDENT'S HEAD; AT 10 O'CLOCK HIGH; APPROX 1/4 MI AWAY AND DSNDING. FOR 3 SECONDS; CESSNA WAS CONSTANT RELATIVE BEARING SO I TOOK CTL AND LOWERED NOSE TO REMAIN 900 FT AGL. A CESSNA PASSED OVERHEAD APPROX 100 FT HIGHER. AFTER 5 SECONDS; I PERMITTED STUDENT TO PROCEED ON XWIND LEG; TURNING TO 050 DEGS AND CLBING TO 1500 FT MSL. I BROADCAST ON CTAF; 'ACFT SHOOTING INST APCH TO GAI; YOU JUST CAUSED A NEAR COLLISION; SUGGEST YOU BREAK OFF APCH AT TPA WHEN FLYING IN VMC!' NO REPLY. WHILE ON DOWNWIND LEG AT 1500 FT MSL; I OBSERVED SAME CESSNA FLYING DOWNWIND LEG MUCH LOWER THAN TPA (ESTIMATE 500 FT MSL) AND FAR CLOSER LATERALLY TO RWY THAN APPROPRIATE (ESTIMATE 600 FT FROM RWY; FLT PATH APPEARED FROM MY VIEWPOINT TO BE OVERHEAD NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF ACFT PARKING AREA). I BROADCAST ON CTAF; 'CESSNA ACFT Y DO YOU REALIZE YOU JUST CAUSED AN NMAC?' ACFT Y BROADCAST A MUMBLED REPLY THAT I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND. I DID NOT COMMENT FURTHER. AS MY STUDENT PROCEEDED DOWNWIND GAI 32 AT 1500 FT MSL; I WATCHED ACFT Y CONTINUE FLYING DOWNWIND VERY LOW AND VERY CLOSE TO RWY; UNTIL ACFT Y WAS APPROX 1/4 MI BEYOND ARR END OF GAI 32 RWY. ACFT Y THEN MADE A 180 DEG R TURN TO A DIRECTION PARALLEL TO GAI 32; BUT APPROX 1/4 MI S OF EXTENDED CTRLINE OF GAI 32. ACFT Y THEN CONTINUED TO TURN R AND THEN L TO LINE UP WITH EXTENDED CTRLINE; THEN LANDED. ACFT Y DID NOT MAKE ANY TFC PATTERN CALLS UNTIL 'FINAL' ONCE ESTABLISHED ON FINAL APCH. I CONTINUED TO FLY TFC PATTERNS WITH MY STUDENT; AND LANDED FULL-STOP AFTER 3-4 MORE CIRCUITS. WHILE MY STUDENT WAS PERFORMING PRE TKOF CHKS APPROX 30 MINS LATER; ACFT Y RECEIVED IFR CLRNC; TAXIED PAST MY ACFT FOR DEP GAI 32; AND DEPARTED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. MY INTERP: I BELIEVE ACFT Y WAS PRACTICING A VOR 14 INST APCH IN VMC; INCLUDING CIRCLE-TO-LAND GAI 32. ACFT Y ELECTED TO PERFORM THESE MANEUVERS IN THE MANNER APPROPRIATE TO INST CONDITIONS; INCLUDING THE FULL CIRCLE-TO-LAND MANEUVER. I BELIEVE ACFT Y DSNDED BELOW PUBLISHED MINIMUMS FOR APCH (1200 FT MSL) -- PERHAPS AFTER OBTAINING VISUAL ON RWY -- TO APPROX 1000 FT MSL; THEN FLEW DOWNWIND AND CIRCLE-TO-LAND AS WOULD BE DONE IN IMC (THOUGH 200+ FT HIGHER; AND LATERALLY MORE DISTANT FROM RWY DURING DOWNWIND LEG). MY CONCERN: PLT (INSTRUCTOR?) IN ACFT Y PERFORMED HIS/HER MANEUVERS WITH ABSOLUTELY NO REGARD TO ANY OF SEVERAL OTHER ACFT IN GAI TFC PATTERN; IN VMC. THE MANEUVER WAS POORLY PERFORMED BUT; FAR MORE IMPORTANT; WAS DANGEROUSLY PERFORMED WITH NO CONSIDERATION FOR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WITH OTHER ACFT OPERATING IN VICINITY OF GAI. THIS FREQUENTLY-OCCURRING NMAC IS ENCOURAGED BY LACK OF CLR GUIDANCE IN AIM; AND LACK OF CLR GUIDANCE BY FAA TO INSTRUCTORS/PLTS. MY RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) INSTRUMENT INSTRUCTORS AND STUDENTS SHOULD BE REQUIRED DURING TESTS/REVIEWS; TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF THESE DISCIPLINES: A) PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APCHS PERFORMED AT UNCTLED ARPTS IN VMC SHOULD USE PUBLISHED TPA AS APPROPRIATE DA/MDA; AND B) EXCEPT WHEN NO OTHER ACFT ARE PRESENT; DSCNT BELOW THAT MINIMUM IN VMC SHOULD ONLY BE PERFORMED IN CONFORMANCE WITH NORMAL VMC TFC PATTERNS AND ACTUAL TFC FLOWS AT THE ARPT CONCERNED.