Narrative:

We were proceeding eastbound on the bpr 078 degree radial at 7000' MSL for the hvn 3 arrival. In the vicinity of the celin intersection ATC instructed us to turn right to a heading of 150 degree and to descend to 4000' MSL. Descending through 5000' ATC issued traffic at 10:30 to 11 O'clock nwbnd. About 30 seconds later, ATC requested that we expedite to 4000' and informed us that the previously issued traffic was showing an unconfirmed altitude of 4200'. ATC then instructed us to turn to a heading of 180 degree. The captain observed the traffic and pointed him out to me. When I first observed the traffic he appeared to be on a collision course with us. I increased the rate of descent and the angle of bank. The traffic did not appear to be trying to avoid our aircraft at this time. It appeared at first that he was turning into us and descending into our flight path. After seeing that we still had a conflict, I again increased the rate of descent and increased the angle of bank to approximately 45 degree. This final maneuver assured us of clearance of the conflicting traffic. During the 15-30 seconds this event took place the other aircraft did not appear to use any evasive action at any time. I feel ATC handled this very poorly. They obviously had the other aircraft transponder return and altitude. Why were we vectored into the path of another aircraft and given a descent thru his altitude and then given a traffic alert. The traffic should have been issued to us and sighted before the clearance to the lower altitude and the turn was issued. Poor handling planning by ATC and the lack of evasive action by the other aircraft contributed immensely to this near midair collision.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLOSE PROX ACR-MLG UNK ACFT NEAR DAL.

Narrative: WE WERE PROCEEDING EBND ON THE BPR 078 DEG RADIAL AT 7000' MSL FOR THE HVN 3 ARR. IN THE VICINITY OF THE CELIN INTXN ATC INSTRUCTED US TO TURN RIGHT TO A HDG OF 150 DEG AND TO DSND TO 4000' MSL. DESCENDING THROUGH 5000' ATC ISSUED TFC AT 10:30 TO 11 O'CLOCK NWBND. ABOUT 30 SECONDS LATER, ATC REQUESTED THAT WE EXPEDITE TO 4000' AND INFORMED US THAT THE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED TFC WAS SHOWING AN UNCONFIRMED ALT OF 4200'. ATC THEN INSTRUCTED US TO TURN TO A HDG OF 180 DEG. THE CAPT OBSERVED THE TFC AND POINTED HIM OUT TO ME. WHEN I FIRST OBSERVED THE TFC HE APPEARED TO BE ON A COLLISION COURSE WITH US. I INCREASED THE RATE OF DSCNT AND THE ANGLE OF BANK. THE TFC DID NOT APPEAR TO BE TRYING TO AVOID OUR ACFT AT THIS TIME. IT APPEARED AT FIRST THAT HE WAS TURNING INTO US AND DESCENDING INTO OUR FLT PATH. AFTER SEEING THAT WE STILL HAD A CONFLICT, I AGAIN INCREASED THE RATE OF DSCNT AND INCREASED THE ANGLE OF BANK TO APPROX 45 DEG. THIS FINAL MANEUVER ASSURED US OF CLRNC OF THE CONFLICTING TFC. DURING THE 15-30 SECONDS THIS EVENT TOOK PLACE THE OTHER ACFT DID NOT APPEAR TO USE ANY EVASIVE ACTION AT ANY TIME. I FEEL ATC HANDLED THIS VERY POORLY. THEY OBVIOUSLY HAD THE OTHER ACFT XPONDER RETURN AND ALT. WHY WERE WE VECTORED INTO THE PATH OF ANOTHER ACFT AND GIVEN A DSCNT THRU HIS ALT AND THEN GIVEN A TFC ALERT. THE TFC SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO US AND SIGHTED BEFORE THE CLRNC TO THE LOWER ALT AND THE TURN WAS ISSUED. POOR HANDLING PLANNING BY ATC AND THE LACK OF EVASIVE ACTION BY THE OTHER ACFT CONTRIBUTED IMMENSELY TO THIS NEAR MIDAIR COLLISION.

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.