Near midair collision.

Attributes
ACN	92543
Time
Date	198808
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : sea
State Reference	WA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 8200 msl bound upper : 9000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Route In Use	enroute airway : zse
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 130 flight time total : 7000 flight time type : 585
ASRS Report	92543
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : nmac
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 300 vertical : 300
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

During climb out from sea at about 7000' on an IFR flight plan, the ATC controller reported traffic at 1 O'clock at 8700' of altitude. The controller told us to maintain 8200' till clear of traffic, which he was not controling. We called the traffic in sight and said we would maintain visual from the aircraft. The controller cleared us to climb to an altitude of 23000'. While climbing, the VFR aircraft at 8700' appeared to change course towards us and climb a bit, to about 9000'. This caused our aircraft to alter course slightly, and climb at a faster pace. The 2 aircraft came within about 300' of each other. Our aircraft had landing lights, strobe, navigation and wing anti-ice lights on for collision avoidance. The VFR aircraft never saw us. I feel that no one was at fault in this situation. It could not have been avoided. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states second aircraft was an small aircraft, no lights on. Even with close proximity reporter feels not a real problem as they had traffic in sight constantly. He does not consider alteration of course and climb rate as evasive action.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC.

Narrative: DURING CLBOUT FROM SEA AT ABOUT 7000' ON AN IFR FLT PLAN, THE ATC CTLR RPTED TFC AT 1 O'CLOCK AT 8700' OF ALT. THE CTLR TOLD US TO MAINTAIN 8200' TILL CLEAR OF TFC, WHICH HE WAS NOT CTLING. WE CALLED THE TFC IN SIGHT AND SAID WE WOULD MAINTAIN VISUAL FROM THE ACFT. THE CTLR CLRED US TO CLB TO AN ALT OF 23000'. WHILE CLBING, THE VFR ACFT AT 8700' APPEARED TO CHANGE COURSE TOWARDS US AND CLB A BIT, TO ABOUT 9000'. THIS CAUSED OUR ACFT TO ALTER COURSE SLIGHTLY, AND CLB AT A FASTER PACE. THE 2 ACFT CAME WITHIN ABOUT 300' OF EACH OTHER. OUR ACFT HAD LNDG LIGHTS, STROBE, NAV AND WING ANTI-ICE LIGHTS ON FOR COLLISION AVOIDANCE. THE VFR ACFT NEVER SAW US. I FEEL THAT NO ONE WAS AT FAULT IN THIS SITUATION. IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATES SECOND ACFT WAS AN SMA, NO LIGHTS ON. EVEN WITH CLOSE PROX RPTR FEELS NOT A REAL PROB AS THEY HAD TFC IN SIGHT CONSTANTLY. HE DOES NOT CONSIDER ALTERATION OF COURSE AND CLB RATE AS EVASIVE ACTION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.