Narrative:

We were cruising at 10000' over abb VORTAC when sdf approach control (I think frequency 120.5) called VFR traffic, 1-2 O'clock at 10000'. I told the crew 'that is our altitude,' and we all looked for him. The copilot was flying and he was the first to see the plane. It was much closer than 1 mi at our altitude and converging rapidly. There was no time to react and the plane flew just under and behind us. None of us could determine the exact amount of feet that separated us. Could not the sdf approach control note that a midair with a VFR aircraft is the same as with an IFR aircraft. We do not yet have collision avoidance equipment on our aircraft, but if we did I might understand how a controller could expect us to evade an airplane we do not have visibility contact with. A vector around traffic would have been appreciated in this case.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WHILE CRUISING AT 10000' REPORTER ACFT HAD A NMAC WITH A SMALL TWIN ENG JET ACFT.

Narrative: WE WERE CRUISING AT 10000' OVER ABB VORTAC WHEN SDF APCH CTL (I THINK FREQ 120.5) CALLED VFR TFC, 1-2 O'CLOCK AT 10000'. I TOLD THE CREW 'THAT IS OUR ALT,' AND WE ALL LOOKED FOR HIM. THE COPLT WAS FLYING AND HE WAS THE FIRST TO SEE THE PLANE. IT WAS MUCH CLOSER THAN 1 MI AT OUR ALT AND CONVERGING RAPIDLY. THERE WAS NO TIME TO REACT AND THE PLANE FLEW JUST UNDER AND BEHIND US. NONE OF US COULD DETERMINE THE EXACT AMOUNT OF FEET THAT SEPARATED US. COULD NOT THE SDF APCH CTL NOTE THAT A MIDAIR WITH A VFR ACFT IS THE SAME AS WITH AN IFR ACFT. WE DO NOT YET HAVE COLLISION AVOIDANCE EQUIP ON OUR ACFT, BUT IF WE DID I MIGHT UNDERSTAND HOW A CTLR COULD EXPECT US TO EVADE AN AIRPLANE WE DO NOT HAVE VIS CONTACT WITH. A VECTOR AROUND TFC WOULD HAVE BEEN APPRECIATED IN THIS CASE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.