Climb through occupied altitude in terminal area based upon visual separation with traffic not sight...

Attributes
ACN	206057
Time
Date	199203
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mem
State Reference	TN
Altitude	msl bound lower : 2000 msl bound upper : 3000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mem tower : ord
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff climbout : initial climbout : intermediate altitude
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 70 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 70
ASRS Report	206057
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 2000 vertical : 200
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Mem conducting simultaneous departures from 36L and right. We were departing 36L, assigned runway heading 3000 ft. Immediately after liftoff, tower advises, 'traffic off the east side ahead and at 2 O'clock, advise in sight.' unable to acquire visually due to his altitude assignment of 2000 ft. He was leveling as we were climbing through his altitude. We expected departures ahead of us to be above us. Tower re-transmitted that traffic was '200 ft below,' and now we began to look down over our nose. (At this time, we were about 18 degrees nose up, very difficult to see traffic in this relative position. Also, lights of city beneath conflicted with acquiring traffic. Finally, we saw him about 12:30 to 1 O'clock and appeared about 1 mi away. Our courses were uncomfortably close -- I'm glad I saw him, but just as easily I could have missed him. I don't think this was any way to run an airport. The traffic was an large transport. I don't' know if this was a foul-up or not -- but I hope so, instead of a planned operation. ATC put us in what I believe was unacceptable and unnecessary situation.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLB THROUGH OCCUPIED ALT IN TERMINAL AREA BASED UPON VISUAL SEPARATION WITH TFC NOT SIGHTED.

Narrative: MEM CONDUCTING SIMULTANEOUS DEPS FROM 36L AND R. WE WERE DEPARTING 36L, ASSIGNED RWY HDG 3000 FT. IMMEDIATELY AFTER LIFTOFF, TWR ADVISES, 'TFC OFF THE E SIDE AHEAD AND AT 2 O'CLOCK, ADVISE IN SIGHT.' UNABLE TO ACQUIRE VISUALLY DUE TO HIS ALT ASSIGNMENT OF 2000 FT. HE WAS LEVELING AS WE WERE CLBING THROUGH HIS ALT. WE EXPECTED DEPS AHEAD OF US TO BE ABOVE US. TWR RE-XMITTED THAT TFC WAS '200 FT BELOW,' AND NOW WE BEGAN TO LOOK DOWN OVER OUR NOSE. (AT THIS TIME, WE WERE ABOUT 18 DEGS NOSE UP, VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE TFC IN THIS RELATIVE POS. ALSO, LIGHTS OF CITY BENEATH CONFLICTED WITH ACQUIRING TFC. FINALLY, WE SAW HIM ABOUT 12:30 TO 1 O'CLOCK AND APPEARED ABOUT 1 MI AWAY. OUR COURSES WERE UNCOMFORTABLY CLOSE -- I'M GLAD I SAW HIM, BUT JUST AS EASILY I COULD HAVE MISSED HIM. I DON'T THINK THIS WAS ANY WAY TO RUN AN ARPT. THE TFC WAS AN LGT. I DON'T' KNOW IF THIS WAS A FOUL-UP OR NOT -- BUT I HOPE SO, INSTEAD OF A PLANNED OP. ATC PUT US IN WHAT I BELIEVE WAS UNACCEPTABLE AND UNNECESSARY SITUATION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.

Climb through occupied altitude in terminal area based upon visual separation with traffic not sighted.