Possible airborne conflict, less severe.

Attributes
ACN	103092
Time
Date	198901
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : sav
State Reference	GA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 2000 msl bound upper : 2000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : sav artcc : zau
Operator	general aviation : corporate
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	other
Make Model Name	Experimental
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 7000
ASRS Report	103092
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action other
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	vertical : 500
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Ambiguous
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

I was PIC of an medium large transport being vectored on an IFR clearance to a visibility approach to runway 36 at sav. The approach course comes in close proximity to svn, which has a published fixed wing pattern altitude of 1500'. I was flying my assigned altitude of 2000' and was being vectored for the final approach. An aircraft in the VFR pattern at hunter aaf filed a near miss report and claims the vertical sep was less than 200', and he had to take evasive action in order to avoid a collision. The arrival controller reported the traffic to me and I acknowledged that I had him in sight. I estimate that the vertical sep was 500' (standard between IFR and VFR) and I felt there was no collision potential. It would appear that the pilot of the spc either misjudged the sep or climbed several hundred ft above his altitude restriction after he was out of my field of vision. In any event, the proximity of the IFR pattern for runway 36 at sav and the VFR pattern at svn should be addressed in the appropriate publications, the aim for civilians and the IFR en route supplement for DOD operators.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POSSIBLE AIRBORNE CONFLICT, LESS SEVERE.

Narrative: I WAS PIC OF AN MLG BEING VECTORED ON AN IFR CLRNC TO A VIS APCH TO RWY 36 AT SAV. THE APCH COURSE COMES IN CLOSE PROX TO SVN, WHICH HAS A PUBLISHED FIXED WING PATTERN ALT OF 1500'. I WAS FLYING MY ASSIGNED ALT OF 2000' AND WAS BEING VECTORED FOR THE FINAL APCH. AN ACFT IN THE VFR PATTERN AT HUNTER AAF FILED A NEAR MISS RPT AND CLAIMS THE VERT SEP WAS LESS THAN 200', AND HE HAD TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION IN ORDER TO AVOID A COLLISION. THE ARR CTLR RPTED THE TFC TO ME AND I ACKNOWLEDGED THAT I HAD HIM IN SIGHT. I ESTIMATE THAT THE VERT SEP WAS 500' (STANDARD BTWN IFR AND VFR) AND I FELT THERE WAS NO COLLISION POTENTIAL. IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE PLT OF THE SPC EITHER MISJUDGED THE SEP OR CLBED SEVERAL HUNDRED FT ABOVE HIS ALT RESTRICTION AFTER HE WAS OUT OF MY FIELD OF VISION. IN ANY EVENT, THE PROX OF THE IFR PATTERN FOR RWY 36 AT SAV AND THE VFR PATTERN AT SVN SHOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE APPROPRIATE PUBLICATIONS, THE AIM FOR CIVILIANS AND THE IFR ENRTE SUPPLEMENT FOR DOD OPERATORS.

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.