Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Communication Breakdown
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Human Factors; Procedure
I was returning to Valdosta Georgia and made two way radio contact with Valdosta tower approximately 10 miles Southeast of VLD. I was told by Valdosta tower to report a 3 mile final to Runway 35. I then proceeded to join the final approach for Runway 35 about 4 miles south of the threshold of Runway 35. When I was about 5-6 miles south a jet reported a left downwind to Runway 35. The jet was about 6 miles west of the runway at that time on the left downwind to 35. Tower cleared the jet to land and asked if I had traffic in sight. I called traffic in sight and was cleared to land Number 2 behind the jet. I was already ahead of the jet but was cleared to land Number 2. This caused an issue because now I had to reposition to be behind the jet. I advised that I was going to have to turn back away from the airport. As i was making a left turn to heading of southeast the jet was on base leg. The pilot of the jet asked tower 'what is [our aircraft] doing'? I responded that I was trying to get out of the way. The jet passed off my right wing at a distance of about a mile as I was rolling out on a heading of southeast. After landing I called Valdosta tower and asked if the controller on duty was aware of the issue with the [our aircraft] and the jet. He replied that their was no issue because both aircraft had each other in sight. I asked if he was aware of the potential near mid-air collision and he said that he didn't think it was an issue. I asked what he did as a tower controller to separate the conflicting traffic. He did not answer. Tower did nothing to separate the two aircraft. If I had not seen the potential hazard and took evasive action immediately we could have had a mid-air collision. The tower controller and the student working traffic were totally oblivious to the conflict and never gave either aircraft instructions to provide separation. Valdosta Tower is being operated by a company who provides training to potential air traffic controllers. For several years now I have noticed that training has become their first priority and separating aircraft is secondary to training. That was the case in this incident. The student controlling traffic was not capable of providing separation services and the controller on duty providing training to this student did not intervene to separate traffic. If either pilot in this case had been a low time pilot there would have been a potential collision. My recommendation is that Valdosta Tower cease all student training until an investigation is conducted and a safety program is initiated to ensure that this all too common occurrence never ever happens again at Valdosta. I also recommend that when someone is being trained in the tower that the person providing the training have a significant level of experience. I am afraid that the tower controller providing training to the student in this case was a very inexperienced controller himself and this lack of experience combined with the additional responsibility of training a student was beyond his capability.
GA pilot reported experiencing an airborne conflict while on approach to VLD airport.  Reporter stated ATC instructions contributed to the event.