When ATC cleared an emb-145 flight crew to an altitude already inhabited by another aircraft; a TCAS...

Attributes
ACN	1236853
Time
Date	201502
Local Time Of Day	0601-1200
Place
Locale Reference	ZDC.ARTCC
State Reference	VA
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Cruise
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Pilot Flying Captain
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Altitude Undershoot Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Narrative:

Told to descend by ATC; checked TCAS and noticed an aircraft climbing into that altitude. Fl320 to Fl300. Pilot flying captain; asked to query ATC on traffic/altitude by pilot not flying first officer. During query a TCAS RA was issued and complied with both our aircraft and an airbus flight opposite direction; they descended and we climbed. Multiple aircraft and ATC communications followed but still conflicted with TCAS RA. Aircraft were in close proximity but remained in visual separation while complying with TCAS instructions. ATC finally issued a higher altitude for us after event at fl 340. Late instructions; conflicting resolutions (ATC; pilot; TCAS) and communication failure/ similar call signs all were threats in a time compressed manner. Could be possible that ATC confused which aircraft was which and issued opposite instructions than intended.... No further conflicts arose and we continued to destination.communication was the largest threat. Although not ideal; captain pilot flying; could have communicated directly to ATC about possible conflict decreasing time to action; both with ATC instructions and resolutions.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: When ATC cleared an EMB-145 flight crew to an altitude already inhabited by another aircraft; a TCAS RA was received and complied with in a timely fashion.

Narrative: Told to descend by ATC; checked TCAS and noticed an aircraft climbing into that altitude. Fl320 to Fl300. Pilot Flying CAPTAIN; asked to query ATC on traffic/altitude by Pilot Not Flying First Officer. During query a TCAS RA was issued and complied with both our aircraft and an Airbus flight opposite direction; they descended and we climbed. Multiple aircraft and ATC communications followed but still conflicted with TCAS RA. Aircraft were in close proximity but remained in visual separation while complying with TCAS instructions. ATC finally issued a higher altitude for us after event at FL 340. Late instructions; conflicting resolutions (ATC; pilot; TCAS) and communication failure/ similar call signs all were threats in a time compressed manner. Could be possible that ATC confused which aircraft was which and issued opposite instructions than intended.... No further conflicts arose and we continued to destination.Communication was the largest threat. Although not ideal; Captain Pilot Flying; could have communicated directly to ATC about possible conflict decreasing time to action; both with ATC instructions and resolutions.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.

When ATC cleared an emb-145 flight crew to an altitude already inhabited by another aircraft; a TCAS RA was received and complied with in a timely fashion.