Narrative:

After taking off from runway 28R at pdx departure control issued a turn to 160 heading. We were already cleared to 9000 ft (this turn seemed reasonable account runway 28L was closed). Soon, 3 things happened at once: 1) we came on top of an overcast, 2) departure issued an urgent level-off at 3000 ft, 3) the TCASII gave an RA of descend-descend. We followed the TCASII command and observed the conflicting traffic -- which was the small transport which departed IFR just before we did. Apparently (learned from a series of later phone calls). Our radar tag attached itself to another jet departure about 8 mi in front of us -- the turn to 160 heading was really for him. The TCASII saved the day and a very alert controller was seconds behind the TCASII -- but probably would have been too late. I don't understand the technicalities, but contributing to the error was the fact that both aircraft (jets) had transponder codes a few digits apart. If transponder codes were assigned truly at random, the chances of my type of incident could be reduced. Maybe NASA could look into how transponder codes are assigned and find a method which takes advantage of true random assignments.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TRACON ARTS RADAR DOES A DATA TAG SWAP WHICH CAUSES A LTSS OCCURRENCE.

Narrative: AFTER TAKING OFF FROM RWY 28R AT PDX DEP CTL ISSUED A TURN TO 160 HDG. WE WERE ALREADY CLRED TO 9000 FT (THIS TURN SEEMED REASONABLE ACCOUNT RWY 28L WAS CLOSED). SOON, 3 THINGS HAPPENED AT ONCE: 1) WE CAME ON TOP OF AN OVCST, 2) DEP ISSUED AN URGENT LEVEL-OFF AT 3000 FT, 3) THE TCASII GAVE AN RA OF DSND-DSND. WE FOLLOWED THE TCASII COMMAND AND OBSERVED THE CONFLICTING TFC -- WHICH WAS THE SMT WHICH DEPARTED IFR JUST BEFORE WE DID. APPARENTLY (LEARNED FROM A SERIES OF LATER PHONE CALLS). OUR RADAR TAG ATTACHED ITSELF TO ANOTHER JET DEP ABOUT 8 MI IN FRONT OF US -- THE TURN TO 160 HDG WAS REALLY FOR HIM. THE TCASII SAVED THE DAY AND A VERY ALERT CTLR WAS SECONDS BEHIND THE TCASII -- BUT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN TOO LATE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TECHNICALITIES, BUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE ERROR WAS THE FACT THAT BOTH ACFT (JETS) HAD XPONDER CODES A FEW DIGITS APART. IF XPONDER CODES WERE ASSIGNED TRULY AT RANDOM, THE CHANCES OF MY TYPE OF INCIDENT COULD BE REDUCED. MAYBE NASA COULD LOOK INTO HOW XPONDER CODES ARE ASSIGNED AND FIND A METHOD WHICH TAKES ADVANTAGE OF TRUE RANDOM ASSIGNMENTS.

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.