Narrative:

Approximately 15-20 mi east of pns the flight was cleared for the visual approach to runway 26. Both pilots confirmed that the airport was in sight prior to the clearance. As the aircraft descended through 6000 ft; the PF started a gradual turn towards the airport to intercept the extended centerline of the runway. At about 5000 ft; a TCAS target appeared within the 2.5 mi ring at about our 10 O'clock position indicating -02. No mention of traffic was given to us by ATC. Within about 10 seconds the target went to a TA and then RA. At this time ATC issued a TA to the other aircraft. At the same time the PF initiated a climb based on the TCAS RA. Due to the close proximity of both aircraft's altitudes; the momentum of our descent put us about 100 ft below the other aircraft before we could establish a positive climb. The PF initiated a smooth climb to about 1000 ft above the target which cleared us of the conflict. We notified ATC of the RA conflict and that we were maneuvering to avoid. Neither myself nor the PF had visual contact with the other target. After clearing the conflict; ATC reclred us back to the visual approach to runway 26 at pns. A significant factor in the event based on radio conversation was the other aircraft was maneuvering and/or transiting the airspace unexpectedly. ATC seemed surprised by his location. Another factor was that ATC failed to give us any TA of aircraft in our vicinity when we were issued the approach clearance. Upon seeing the initial target at -02 I think we should have initiated a more aggressive leveloff and possible turn away from the target knowing the proximity of both aircraft. Supplemental information from acn 699862: after the flight was complete I contacted TRACON to get an identify on the offending traffic. The ATC controller was talking to this aircraft during the RA. Apparently the traffic was returning from the practice area.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ200 FLT CREW HAS A TCAS RA DURING APCH TO PNS.

Narrative: APPROX 15-20 MI E OF PNS THE FLT WAS CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 26. BOTH PLTS CONFIRMED THAT THE ARPT WAS IN SIGHT PRIOR TO THE CLRNC. AS THE ACFT DSNDED THROUGH 6000 FT; THE PF STARTED A GRADUAL TURN TOWARDS THE ARPT TO INTERCEPT THE EXTENDED CTRLINE OF THE RWY. AT ABOUT 5000 FT; A TCAS TARGET APPEARED WITHIN THE 2.5 MI RING AT ABOUT OUR 10 O'CLOCK POS INDICATING -02. NO MENTION OF TFC WAS GIVEN TO US BY ATC. WITHIN ABOUT 10 SECONDS THE TARGET WENT TO A TA AND THEN RA. AT THIS TIME ATC ISSUED A TA TO THE OTHER ACFT. AT THE SAME TIME THE PF INITIATED A CLB BASED ON THE TCAS RA. DUE TO THE CLOSE PROX OF BOTH ACFT'S ALTS; THE MOMENTUM OF OUR DSCNT PUT US ABOUT 100 FT BELOW THE OTHER ACFT BEFORE WE COULD ESTABLISH A POSITIVE CLB. THE PF INITIATED A SMOOTH CLB TO ABOUT 1000 FT ABOVE THE TARGET WHICH CLRED US OF THE CONFLICT. WE NOTIFIED ATC OF THE RA CONFLICT AND THAT WE WERE MANEUVERING TO AVOID. NEITHER MYSELF NOR THE PF HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE OTHER TARGET. AFTER CLRING THE CONFLICT; ATC RECLRED US BACK TO THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 26 AT PNS. A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN THE EVENT BASED ON RADIO CONVERSATION WAS THE OTHER ACFT WAS MANEUVERING AND/OR TRANSITING THE AIRSPACE UNEXPECTEDLY. ATC SEEMED SURPRISED BY HIS LOCATION. ANOTHER FACTOR WAS THAT ATC FAILED TO GIVE US ANY TA OF ACFT IN OUR VICINITY WHEN WE WERE ISSUED THE APCH CLRNC. UPON SEEING THE INITIAL TARGET AT -02 I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE INITIATED A MORE AGGRESSIVE LEVELOFF AND POSSIBLE TURN AWAY FROM THE TARGET KNOWING THE PROX OF BOTH ACFT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 699862: AFTER THE FLT WAS COMPLETE I CONTACTED TRACON TO GET AN IDENT ON THE OFFENDING TFC. THE ATC CTLR WAS TALKING TO THIS ACFT DURING THE RA. APPARENTLY THE TFC WAS RETURNING FROM THE PRACTICE AREA.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.