instructional flight collides with CAP plane

[alaskaflyer]

I just noticed this report in the database today. It is a little hard to reconcile the chain of events with the statements of the two pilots but it appears the CFI and student turned base to final in front of / on top of the CAP plane which had been cleared to land on a long final, despite claiming to have the plane "in sight."

http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081117X44716&key=1

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) personnel from the Fairbanks Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), reported that the Cessna 182R had been cleared by controllers at the Fairbanks Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) for landing on runway 19L, and was established on a long final approach. The Cessna 152 was on a right downwind traffic pattern for landing on runway 19L, and was number two for landing. The pilot of the Cessna 152 was told to extend his downwind pattern, and then to execute a right 360 degree turn to allow additional spacing between landing airplanes. The pilot of the Cessna 152 made a left 360 degree turn. The left wingtip of the Cessna 152 struck the rudder of the Cessna 182R. Both airplanes landed safely.

It doesn't appear that the deviation made much difference in the collision, the command to execute the 360 appeared to come pretty much simultaneous to the impact - at least that's how I read it.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

I just noticed this report in the database today. It is a little hard to reconcile the chain of events with the statements of the two pilots but it appears the CFI and student turned base to final in front of / on top of the CAP plane which had been cleared to land on a long final, despite claiming to have the plane "in sight."

http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081117X44716&key=1

It doesn't appear that the deviation made much difference in the collision, the command to execute the 360 appeared to come pretty much simultaneous to the impact - at least that's how I read it.

The LEFT 360 makes more sense, and may be why the 152 turned that way... but if he did, how'd he hit a 182 on straight in final??

If you're in that 152, on right downwind to 19L, the runway is off to your right side, or behind you on your right. Either way, final is "to your right". The 182 is southbound, inbound on a long straight in final, and would also be to your right (12-3pm position). Why would the controller ask for a right 360 for spacing from the 152?

 

[KennyFlys]

If the 152 was told he was #2, he should have been looking for someone to be touching down or on short final before him. If nothing was sighted, he shouldn't have turned base, especially with a parallel runway he could also interfere with.

Recently, a 150 was given #1 for landing before us. Another aircraft was #3 behind us. It turns out the 150 which was told to report left downwind was going to end up on a three-mile left base. I'm scanning like crazy looking for something and the nearest plane I can see is a faint light a good three miles or more to the east and heading north. When I verified with the controller, we were switched around and given #1, cleared the land. The #3 plane became #2 and the 150 was vectored north to become #3.

Ya gotta be where you claim to be and ya gotta be certain where you are when you make that claim. Others depend on that information as does the controller when conditions make it difficult for him to spot you. Sure, the Austin tower controller could have looked at radar but he's watching two runways with parallel approaches and departures. I'd rather have his eyes outside just as much as my student.

 

[alaskaflyer]

After reading it, it appeared that the 152 turned base then final early, despite being told to extend their downwind and despite reporting landing traffic "in sight." When the tower saw what was happening they commanded the 152 to execute a right 360. But if you read the CFI's account he claims by that time he was already on top of the other plane and saw the other plane's "nose" appear under his, and had already applied power and started a left climbing turn and was disinclined to reverse course with a collision imminent. At least that is how I read it. Not the clearest writing in the world.

 

[KennyFlys]

Why would the controller ask for a right 360 for spacing from the 152?

It seems like an error on the part of the controller but then from his perspective, a right turn may have been the best move for avoidance.

From the CFI's perspective, he may have thought the 182 was further in. But then he was down to 300 AGL which should have put him on short final. How soon before that had he heard the 182 cleared to land? A yet to be answered question.

It sounds like the 152 turned base too soon when the controller was wanting a much longer spacing. This is on top of continuing to turn without being certain of the 182's position which he clearly wasn't if he hit it.

 

[Lady Red]

Good points, Ken. I was also thinking that the right 360 might make sense from two other perspectives:

1) The controller perhaps thought the arriving aircraft was lower than the downwind aircraft;

2) If the 152 is on right downwind for 19L, then he's between or over runway 19R (if I'm visualizing this correctly). A left 360, as you suggested, may have interfered with traffic using the runway 19R.

EDIT: This is Troy, on Teresa's computer. ;-)

 

[KennyFlys]

In looking at the airport diagram for PAFA, I can see where the right 360 would make sense. The the threshold for 19L is well beyond the touchdown zone for 19R. The evasive maneuver directed by the tower was likely the fastest as well as not as invasive to traffic on 19R.

I drew what a potential maneuver would look like on the diagram so the scenario would have worked out had the maneuver been taken sooner. Again, I still think the 152 turned too soon without being certain of the position of other traffic.

At AUS, we often come up the west side of the airport with expected landing on 17L. The controllers usually request we don't overfly 17R so we adjust the path to be just north of the threshold. 17L starts south of 17R so it works out well in the end. But, I'm constantly looking for other traffic for 17L not to mention the heavy traffic that mostly uses 17R. If I don't see what the controller advises me of, I'm not crossing the path of any parallel runway, let alone turn base and final for landing on the intended runway.

 

[rottydaddy]

A close shave...

Another example of how tower controllers cannot magically guarantee safety in the pattern.

 

[kkoran]

It seems like an error on the part of the controller but then from his perspective, a right turn may have been the best move for avoidance.

From the CFI's perspective, he may have thought the 182 was further in. But then he was down to 300 AGL which should have put him on short final. How soon before that had he heard the 182 cleared to land? A yet to be answered question.

It sounds like the 152 turned base too soon when the controller was wanting a much longer spacing. This is on top of continuing to turn without being certain of the 182's position which he clearly wasn't if he hit it.

How, exactly, do you think the controller screwed up?

 

[KennyFlys]

How, exactly, do you think the controller screwed up?

I was responding to someone else... don't read more into what I said than is there.

I said "It seems like..." and pretty soon after that I added a "but" with much more. Head back and catch the rest, would ya?

 

[TMetzinger]

EDIT: This is Troy, on Teresa's computer. ;-)

That explains why you're better-looking!

 

[kkoran]

I was responding to someone else... don't read more into what I said than is there.

I said "It seems like..." and pretty soon after that I added a "but" with much more. Head back and catch the rest, would ya?

Ah, got it. My bad.