This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.
Following contact with the Tower at Reid-Hillview Airport of Santa Clara County (KRHV) in California, over the landmark known as UTC, we began a straight-in approach to KRHV Runway 31R at approximately 85 knots groundspeed and still in level flight at approximately 2,500 feet MSL.
Thereafter we began a very gradual descent while I was giving instruction to a student pilot on how to perform the straight-in approach to land at KRHV, referencing landmarks and descent timing, when we were overtaken from above and on the right-hand side by Aircraft Y that appeared to come within 75 feet of our airplane, both vertically and laterally. The encounter occurred just abeam the landmark known as Mt. Misery relative to the straight-in approach, (identifiable on the SFO terminal area chart).
The intruding Aircraft Y overtook our airplane by at least 10 knots and continued to descend below our altitude.
An ADS-B traffic advisory alerted us to the conflict just moments before the encounter, significantly distracting my student during the straight-in approach, requiring me to take the controls.
We did not hear any transmission from the KRHV control tower that this traffic conflict was imminent.
At the same time, there was another airplane behind us (Aircraft Z), which I recall hearing during subsequent KRHV transmissions to have been a tailwheel aircraft, that had a 30-knot overtake of our airplane, and was therefore instructed to perform a right-hand 360° turn for spacing.
The Tower did not inform us directly of this airplane, and I was unaware of its altitude, as the ADS-B did not alert us about this second airplane.
Given the significant distraction and uncertainty of the position of the airplane behind us, I decided to break off the straight-in approach just past Mt. Misery and immediately began a steep climbing right-hand turn from about 2,100 feet MSL, in order to repeat the straight-in approach procedure in the interest of safety, stability of the approach, and for the benefit of my student.
The Tower then asked us “what are you doing,” to which we replied we were circling back to re-establish ourselves on the final approach to Runway 31. The Tower then stated that we should have informed them as to our intentions before “maneuvering,” which I acknowledged. It was unclear to me whether having broken off the approach created a conflict with Aircraft Z behind us, as we were not informed of their altitude at any time.
The second straight-in approach and landing was then performed after circling back overhead Mt. Misery to re-join the straight-in approach to Runway 31R without incident.
While it is apparent to me that I needed to inform the Tower of my intention to break off the straight-in approach even though I was outside of the KRHV airspace, I believe there was inadequate separation provided by the Tower about Aircraft Y that overtook us high and from the right, as well as the overtaking Aircraft Z behind us.
I believe there was also inadequate control of the sequencing of the two other planes, given their significantly faster speed relative to ours.
In the future, I will query the KRHV control tower before breaking off any straight-in approach to land, in case there is any ADS-B traffic alert, traffic that is unequipped with ADS-B or otherwise unseen, that might be overtaking us on straight-in approach to Runway 31 at KRHV.
Primary Problem: Human Factors
ACN: 1869291
No metal was bent, nor fabric torn, so it wasn’t too bad.
VFR is “see and avoid”. I can’t believe Aircraft Y and Z couldn’t see the training aircraft, and if I remember my FAR’s, the aircraft being overtaken has the right of way.
The three-word aviation mantra is “Aviate, Navigate, and Communicate”. The instructor did the right thing in breaking off the approach. He did need to communicate with the tower, but only after he was well established in his new course.
I’m also training at KRHV. I have an idea what the training AC could have been, but it does spark some questions to ask my instructor Saturday.
Sounds more like the Tower needs to be more aware. I’ll assume that the Tower advised Instructor to call the Tower, yet did nothing about the unidentified aircraft creating a dangerous situation. Tower clearly was not in the game on this one.
I think the problem may be that KRHV is a class D airspace. So they do not have authority beyond their airspace. They may have Radar Repeating in their tower, but they probably do not provide flight following outside their class D ring, leaving that up to San Jose Approach/Departure. And not having been there since the late 1990s, I don’t know if they have a Center or Tracon for SFO, San Jose and Oakland that handles approach/departure control for the big 3.
Someone needs a new instructor.