Unnecessary go around after TCASII RA received.

Attributes
ACN	223840
Time
Date	199209
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : azo
State Reference	MI
Altitude	agl bound lower : 1100 agl bound upper : 1100
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : azo
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around
Route In Use	approach : straight in
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	descent : approach other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 4500 flight time type : 2500
ASRS Report	223840
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude non adherence : clearance non adherence : far other anomaly other other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

On approach into azo there were some aircraft in the pattern on an intersecting runway (23/5). At approximately 1100 ft AGL, we received a 'traffic' call on our TCASII, immediately followed by a 'climb' RA. We initiated a go around as per the FARS and company procedure and when time permitted, advised azo tower of our miss and our reason. Tower controller was upset over our missed approach as he said he had us and our conflicting traffic in sight. Controllers need to know that we must comply with a TCASII RA no if's, and's, or but's. Further conversation with tower controller was beneficial as we were able to impress upon him the requirements of our use of the system. Aircraft was never in an unsafe proximity to the avoided traffic.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: UNNECESSARY GAR AFTER TCASII RA RECEIVED.

Narrative: ON APCH INTO AZO THERE WERE SOME ACFT IN THE PATTERN ON AN INTERSECTING RWY (23/5). AT APPROX 1100 FT AGL, WE RECEIVED A 'TFC' CALL ON OUR TCASII, IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED BY A 'CLB' RA. WE INITIATED A GAR AS PER THE FARS AND COMPANY PROC AND WHEN TIME PERMITTED, ADVISED AZO TWR OF OUR MISS AND OUR REASON. TWR CTLR WAS UPSET OVER OUR MISSED APCH AS HE SAID HE HAD US AND OUR CONFLICTING TFC IN SIGHT. CTLRS NEED TO KNOW THAT WE MUST COMPLY WITH A TCASII RA NO IF'S, AND'S, OR BUT'S. FURTHER CONVERSATION WITH TWR CTLR WAS BENEFICIAL AS WE WERE ABLE TO IMPRESS UPON HIM THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR USE OF THE SYS. ACFT WAS NEVER IN AN UNSAFE PROX TO THE AVOIDED TFC.

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.