Narrative:

While flying into stc we were told by center that we were #3 for an approach. We were then vectored for separation. The #1 aircraft canceled his IFR clearance through the #2 aircraft. The #2 aircraft was then cleared for the VOR DME runway 13 approach at stc. We were then cleared direct to the VOR to hold at 5000 ft. Just prior to reaching the VOR, we were cleared for the VOR DME runway 13 approach. We were told to change to advisory frequency which we promptly had done and made a position report on CTAF. Assuming the #2 aircraft had canceled through princeton FSS, we had no reason to question the clearance for the approach. After crossing the VOR, we began our descent to the approach transition altitude of 2700 ft. As we approached 3500 ft, an aircraft appeared on our TCASII 800 ft below us (2700 ft MSL) and approximately 2 mi away at our 12 O'clock position. We received an RA from the TCASII and began to climb. We then switched frequencys back to center. When we asked center if there was another aircraft on the approach, the #2 aircraft responded that he was inbound on the approach and had not canceled his IFR clearance. We came to learn that the #2 aircraft's clearance was canceled by another aircraft on the ground awaiting a clearance from princeton FSS. If we had not had TCASII, the situation would have resulted in two aircraft converging at the same altitude on the same radial. The situation was caused by the aircraft on the ground which falsely idented the aircraft type and 'north' number and voluntarily canceled another aircraft's IFR clearance. Another aircraft should not be able to cancel one's clearance unless verbally communicated to that aircraft that they would like their clearance canceled. Also, it is very obvious to all pilots at my airline that stc needs at least a part time ATCT.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: IMPROPER CANCELLATION OF IFR CLRNC BY AN ACFT ON GND LED TO A TCASII RA ON RPTR ACFT DURING IFR APCH. ARPT UNCTLED AND ACFT LNDG BROADCAST ON CTAF THEIR LOCATION AND INTENTIONS. APPARENT MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT CALL SIGNS WHEN THE LEAD ACFT ON APCH ASKED TO HAVE IFR CANCELLATION RELAYED TO CTR AND ACFT ON GND MISTOOK THE #2 ACFT AS CANCELING.

Narrative: WHILE FLYING INTO STC WE WERE TOLD BY CTR THAT WE WERE #3 FOR AN APCH. WE WERE THEN VECTORED FOR SEPARATION. THE #1 ACFT CANCELED HIS IFR CLRNC THROUGH THE #2 ACFT. THE #2 ACFT WAS THEN CLRED FOR THE VOR DME RWY 13 APCH AT STC. WE WERE THEN CLRED DIRECT TO THE VOR TO HOLD AT 5000 FT. JUST PRIOR TO REACHING THE VOR, WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VOR DME RWY 13 APCH. WE WERE TOLD TO CHANGE TO ADVISORY FREQ WHICH WE PROMPTLY HAD DONE AND MADE A POS RPT ON CTAF. ASSUMING THE #2 ACFT HAD CANCELED THROUGH PRINCETON FSS, WE HAD NO REASON TO QUESTION THE CLRNC FOR THE APCH. AFTER XING THE VOR, WE BEGAN OUR DSCNT TO THE APCH TRANSITION ALT OF 2700 FT. AS WE APCHED 3500 FT, AN ACFT APPEARED ON OUR TCASII 800 FT BELOW US (2700 FT MSL) AND APPROX 2 MI AWAY AT OUR 12 O'CLOCK POS. WE RECEIVED AN RA FROM THE TCASII AND BEGAN TO CLB. WE THEN SWITCHED FREQS BACK TO CTR. WHEN WE ASKED CTR IF THERE WAS ANOTHER ACFT ON THE APCH, THE #2 ACFT RESPONDED THAT HE WAS INBOUND ON THE APCH AND HAD NOT CANCELED HIS IFR CLRNC. WE CAME TO LEARN THAT THE #2 ACFT'S CLRNC WAS CANCELED BY ANOTHER ACFT ON THE GND AWAITING A CLRNC FROM PRINCETON FSS. IF WE HAD NOT HAD TCASII, THE SIT WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN TWO ACFT CONVERGING AT THE SAME ALT ON THE SAME RADIAL. THE SIT WAS CAUSED BY THE ACFT ON THE GND WHICH FALSELY IDENTED THE ACFT TYPE AND 'N' NUMBER AND VOLUNTARILY CANCELED ANOTHER ACFT'S IFR CLRNC. ANOTHER ACFT SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CANCEL ONE'S CLRNC UNLESS VERBALLY COMMUNICATED TO THAT ACFT THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THEIR CLRNC CANCELED. ALSO, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS TO ALL PLTS AT MY AIRLINE THAT STC NEEDS AT LEAST A PART TIME ATCT.

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.