POTENTIAL CONFLICT IN THE TRAFFIC PATTERN WITH 2 ACFT SHOOTING LNDGS.

Narrative

WE WERE CLRED BY TWR FOR TOUCH AND GO WHILE ON LEFT DOWNWIND FOR RWY 15. WE WERE NOTIFIED OF SIMILAR TFC ON RIGHT DOWNWIND FOR RWY 15 (ALSO A TOUCH AND GO). WE ACKNOWLEDGED ACFT IN SIGHT; SLIGHTLY BEHIND OUR POS. WIND FROM E. TAILWIND FOR US; HEADWIND FOR OTHER ACFT. WE TURNED FINAL AND OBSERVED OTHER ACFT HIGHER AND ON BASE. WE CONTINUED DSNDING AND WENT UNDER OTHER ACFT. HE MAY HAVE HAD THE SUN IN HIS EYES; BUT NOTICED US ABOUT 1 MIN LATER AND TALKED TO TWR. NOTHING MORE SAID ON RADIOS. WE DID NOT COMMUNICATE BEFORE PASSING UNDER THE OTHER ACFT; COCKPIT WORKLOAD. THE IMPACT OF THE SITUATION CAME LATER AND THE ONLY NEGATIVE EFFECT WAS AN INCREASE IN ADRENALINE. TWR DID NOT ASK THE SECOND ACFT TO WATCH FOR US. NORMALLY TRNING TFC ARE GIVEN THE PATTERN W OF THE TWR AND FULL STOP TFC GIVEN THE STANDARD PATTERN--A REASONABLE SEP. IN THIS CASE ONE OF US PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE OTHER. TWR USUALLY TELLS TFC; 'N ; YOU ARE #2 TO FOLLOW TFC IN LEFT PATTERN;' ETC. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A STUDENT CTLR IN TWR ALSO. THE HEADWIND PROBABLY KEPT OTHER ACFT FROM TURNING FINAL EARLY. HEADS UP--BASE IS ALSO FOR LOOKING! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: INCIDENT TOOK PLACE AT ROW; ROSWELL; NM. OTHER ACFT WAS AN SMT COMMUTER AND THE RPTR NEVER SAW THE ACFT AT TIME OF PASSING AND COULD NOT ESTIMATE THE DISTANCE OF THE CONFLICT. OVERHEARD A COMMENT MADE LATER THAT EVENING REF THE INCIDENT THAT AN SMT HAD A CONFLICT IN THE PATTERN WITH AN SMA; ASSUMED THEY WERE THE ACFT. NO INVESTIGATION BY THE TWR OR FAA AND THE INCIDENT APPARENTLY HAS BEEN DROPPED.