<< >> NASA ASRS Report 582075, May 2003

F100 crew had less than legal separation in N90 class east due to another aircraft altitude overshoot. Reporter questions ATC situational awareness.

Attributes
ACN	582075
Time
Date	200305
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : hpn.airport
State Reference	NY
Altitude	msl single value : 9000
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : n90.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Fokker 100
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tracon : n90.tracon
Operator	general aviation : corporate
Make Model Name	Dassault-Breguet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	582075
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne critical non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : clearance non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment : tcas other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance FAA Airspace Structure
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

On departure from hpn, passing through 9000 ft, TCASII sounded a traffic alert. ATC did not call the traffic to us. It was apparent that the offending aircraft would hit us if no action were taken. We altered course to our left to avoid him. When asked about the traffic, ATC replied that there was no traffic. We had visual contact with the falcon jet in question. ATC then told us the other aircraft had missed his altitude. Had we not been alerted by TCASII, a midair collision very likely would have occurred. My question is how did this aircraft get off altitude without an ATC alarm.

Related reports:

• Potential conflict less than standard separation. The flight...
• Maf atcs reports minor loss of separation due to controller ...
• A320 first officer believes questionable separation of aircr...
• Sa 227 at myna subjected to loss of separation and situation...
• An MD90 is given VFR traffic by ZFW which becomes a TCASII R...

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.37000feet.com

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: F100 CREW HAD LESS THAN LEGAL SEPARATION IN N90 CLASS E DUE TO ANOTHER ACFT ALT OVERSHOOT. RPTR QUESTIONS ATC SITUATIONAL AWARENESS.

Narrative: ON DEP FROM HPN, PASSING THROUGH 9000 FT, TCASII SOUNDED A TFC ALERT. ATC DID NOT CALL THE TFC TO US. IT WAS APPARENT THAT THE OFFENDING ACFT WOULD HIT US IF NO ACTION WERE TAKEN. WE ALTERED COURSE TO OUR L TO AVOID HIM. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE TFC, ATC REPLIED THAT THERE WAS NO TFC. WE HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE FALCON JET IN QUESTION. ATC THEN TOLD US THE OTHER ACFT HAD MISSED HIS ALT. HAD WE NOT BEEN ALERTED BY TCASII, A MIDAIR COLLISION VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE OCCURRED. MY QUESTION IS HOW DID THIS ACFT GET OFF ALT WITHOUT AN ATC ALARM.

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.