Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 75; Flight Crew Total 8400; Flight Crew Type 5
Confusion
Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Human Factors; Procedure
Both aircraft were approaching ZZZ from the west and calling on the radio distance to the airport and intent to enter right traffic for [Runway] XX. I acquired visual contact with Aircraft Y abeam the departure end of the landing runway when we were about 3/4 of a mile apart and with 200 feet of vertical separation. Aircraft Y was on a slightly extended downwind heading north and I was still on a 45-entry heading north west putting Aircraft Y low and to my right. I elected to make a right 360 turn to re-enter the pattern; which worked out well for spacing. The pilot of Aircraft Y considered the event hazardous however I do not. Both pilots were practicing proper see and avoid procedures; both pilots were announcing position and intention on CTAF and were aware of the potential conflict. My decision to turn right upon acquiring visual contact enabled me to keep sight of the Aircraft Y as I maneuvered to re-enter the pattern. Turning left would have made me lose sight for some time and put us in very close proximity with nearly parallel courses. I would not characterize this event as a near miss because no evasive action was taken nor required. I could have continued my course and we would have missed each other by X mile laterally and 200 feet vertically. This situation is not unusual in traffic pattern operations at non-towered airports. The closest point of approach was less than X mile laterally but still 200 ft. vertically but I maintained visual contact throughout the maneuver to re-enter the traffic pattern.
GA pilot reported an NMAC at a non-towered aiport.