Narrative:

Approaching tvc; and after being cleared for a visual approach; we queried msp approach if we should switch to tower; we were told; 'no; you have traffic 12 O'clock position; xx mi; 2700 ft orbiting.' (I believe we were descending through about 6000 ft.) the TA's given by ATC were given only to our aircraft position and altitude; not direction of flight. We turned away from the reported position of the traffic while monitoring our TCAS. We began turning towards the runway to the west of reported traffic; believing this would allow us to diverge from the conflict aircraft; thus allowing us to continue descent to the runway and into controled class D airspace. Even as we had altered our heading by as much as 25 degrees; we were still advised traffic 12 O'clock position; several times; then off to your right (we responded that the traffic was not in sight to each advisory). We initiated a climb as we came to about 500 ft above said aircraft. At the same moment we initiated the climb; we received a TCAS RA to 'climb;' which we were already responding to; and I verified the minimum climb rate was being attained. I saw the margin of separation as low as 300 ft. As we cleared the conflict I advised msp approach of the RA and we were climbing. We leveled at 4000 ft. The remaining portion of the flight was uneventful. I asked if that aircraft was talking to tower. We were then informed yes. When I phoned tower on the ground; they said the aircraft was VFR and flying a practice approach to runway 28. The tower informed us that they instructed approach to hand us off to tower because of that traffic. Approach control did not ever hand us off; even after we asked to switch over to tower.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB140 EXPERIENCED TCAS RA ON DSCNT FOR VISUAL APCH TO TVC AT APPROX 3200 FT; CITING LATE FREQ CHANGE TO TWR FROM M98.

Narrative: APCHING TVC; AND AFTER BEING CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH; WE QUERIED MSP APCH IF WE SHOULD SWITCH TO TWR; WE WERE TOLD; 'NO; YOU HAVE TFC 12 O'CLOCK POS; XX MI; 2700 FT ORBITING.' (I BELIEVE WE WERE DSNDING THROUGH ABOUT 6000 FT.) THE TA'S GIVEN BY ATC WERE GIVEN ONLY TO OUR ACFT POS AND ALT; NOT DIRECTION OF FLT. WE TURNED AWAY FROM THE RPTED POS OF THE TFC WHILE MONITORING OUR TCAS. WE BEGAN TURNING TOWARDS THE RWY TO THE W OF RPTED TFC; BELIEVING THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO DIVERGE FROM THE CONFLICT ACFT; THUS ALLOWING US TO CONTINUE DSCNT TO THE RWY AND INTO CTLED CLASS D AIRSPACE. EVEN AS WE HAD ALTERED OUR HDG BY AS MUCH AS 25 DEGS; WE WERE STILL ADVISED TFC 12 O'CLOCK POS; SEVERAL TIMES; THEN OFF TO YOUR R (WE RESPONDED THAT THE TFC WAS NOT IN SIGHT TO EACH ADVISORY). WE INITIATED A CLB AS WE CAME TO ABOUT 500 FT ABOVE SAID ACFT. AT THE SAME MOMENT WE INITIATED THE CLB; WE RECEIVED A TCAS RA TO 'CLB;' WHICH WE WERE ALREADY RESPONDING TO; AND I VERIFIED THE MINIMUM CLB RATE WAS BEING ATTAINED. I SAW THE MARGIN OF SEPARATION AS LOW AS 300 FT. AS WE CLRED THE CONFLICT I ADVISED MSP APCH OF THE RA AND WE WERE CLBING. WE LEVELED AT 4000 FT. THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. I ASKED IF THAT ACFT WAS TALKING TO TWR. WE WERE THEN INFORMED YES. WHEN I PHONED TWR ON THE GND; THEY SAID THE ACFT WAS VFR AND FLYING A PRACTICE APCH TO RWY 28. THE TWR INFORMED US THAT THEY INSTRUCTED APCH TO HAND US OFF TO TWR BECAUSE OF THAT TFC. APCH CTL DID NOT EVER HAND US OFF; EVEN AFTER WE ASKED TO SWITCH OVER TO TWR.

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.