SR20
Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 130; Flight Crew Total 23000; Flight Crew Type 850
Time Pressure
Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Human Factors
After announcing out intention to depart from Runway XX at ZZZ; during our initial climb; we identified Aircraft Y approaching head on. After a moment of indecision; we realized that we were about to collide with this aircraft. We initiated an evasive maneuver by lowering our nose and banking to the right; east northeast. After narrowly escaping the collision I make a call on the CTAF frequency asking Aircraft Y if he was aware that Runway XX was in use. His reply was that he was landing on XY. I informed him that the wind was favoring XX and he replied that no; the wind favored Runway XZ; and he added something that was not clearly heard by us but to the effect that he can use any runway he want. I informed him that we narrowly avoided a midair collision and he responded that he had us in sight the whole time.It should be noted that he made no attempt to alter his course until the moment that we began our evasive maneuver. In my opinion; it was our maneuver that alerted him to our position; and only at that time did he alter course. Immediately after the encounter; I determined that the ASOS was reporting the wind at 320/11 gusting to 19 kts. The actions of the pilot of Aircraft Y clearly rose to the level of 14 CFR 91.13 'careless and reckless.'
SR-22 Instructor reported executing a successful evasive maneuver during initial climb due to an NMAC event with another aircraft landing on the opposite runway.