Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 115; Flight Crew Total 3651; Flight Crew Type 3400
Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Human Factors
Aircraft X announced taxi from hangar parking to Runway 5; and proceeded to taxi. Aircraft Y announced taxi from ramp to Runway 5 and proceed to follow Aircraft X. Aircraft Z (Reporter's aircraft) announced taxi from hangar parking area to Runway 5; following Aircraft X; giving way to Aircraft Y and proceeding behind it to the run up area. Aircraft A announced taxi from the ramp to Runway 5 following me. Aircraft B announced entering downwind for Runway 23 as the Aircraft X became airborne on Runway 5. Aircraft Y taxied into position on Runway 5 and informed the inbound that Runway 5 was in use and he was about to begin his takeoff roll on Runway 5. I announced ready in sequence behind Aircraft Y; and again informed the inbound that Runway 5 was in use. Aircraft B said he'd watch for us. I departed behind Aircraft Y and noted the inbound continuing inbound on the downwind for Runway 23 (opposite direction runway abeam my track on the ADS-B in the TFC window and visually identified him in the upwind). I continued on the runway heading with Aircraft A ready for takeoff on Runway 5. Aircraft B then turned close left base as I was approaching pattern altitude with a collision alert on the ADS-B. I advised the Inbound of my altitude and position but he continued in and crossed less than 500 feet below me and proceeded to land opposite traffic.Human PerformanceThere were 4 aircraft all using proper position and radio procedures for an uncontrolled airport and following proper protocol and courtesy procedures. There was no question in anyone's mind that Runway 5 was the active runway and winds were not a factor. Despite this; the operator of Aircraft B elected to continue a course of action that would place him in a conflict situation with certainty. The inbound aircraft chose a course of action which could have caused a mid-air collision resulting in a minimum of 3 fatalities. When it became apparent he had chosen to land against traffic; that there were multiple aircraft using the opposite direction runway; Aircraft B had ample time to change his runway; enter the mid-field left crosswind at pattern altitude and enter the downwind for Runway 5. Instead he chose to disrupt traffic flow for the airport; and place himself and others in serious danger. Of note; there was a nearly identical incident reported at this airport several months ago with a similar conflict situation.I cannot begin to speculate what factors affected the quality of this pilot's performance. Certainly; a course in remedial training for operations at uncontrolled airports is in order. This is my opinion as a former aviation safety counselor.
GA pilot reported another GA aircraft landed runway 23 (opposite direction) at BRD while 4 aircraft were departing on runway 5.