An IFR small aircraft came in close proximity to an unknown opposite direction aircraft.

Attributes
ACN	140305
Time
Date	199003
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : cvi
State Reference	NC
Altitude	msl bound lower : 7000 msl bound upper : 7000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute airway : zdc
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	descent other
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 4 flight time last 90 days : 3 flight time total : 160 flight time type : 80
ASRS Report	140305
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument
Events
Anomaly	conflict : nmac non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 200 vertical : 200
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

I was working the R24 position. The small aircraft aircraft was on an IFR flight plan northbound at 7000'. I first noticed a VFR aircraft southbound at 7500' about 5 mi away. I called traffic at 3 mi and at 1 mi as the VFR aircraft showed 7100' at 3 mi and 7000' at 1 mi. My aircraft said he saw the VFR traffic go by at 200-300' separation. For some reason the VFR conflict alert never activated. If it did, I may have been able to call the traffic sooner. In any case, the see-and-avoid concept seemed to have failed. The small shapes of the 2 aircraft in a head-on situation must not give very much advance warning of the impending near miss. I believe our representation of VFR aircraft is not as good as it used to be on our radar scope. It seems much harder to notice the V (especially with no mode C involved) than it was to notice the squawk code. They made the change to reduce clutter, but I never had a problem with clutter, and I don't believe anyone else in the center environment did either. It's just harder for us to notice the VFR's now. Which is more dangerous.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN IFR SMA CAME IN CLOSE PROX TO AN UNKNOWN OPPOSITE DIRECTION ACFT.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE R24 POSITION. THE SMA ACFT WAS ON AN IFR FLT PLAN NBOUND AT 7000'. I FIRST NOTICED A VFR ACFT SBND AT 7500' ABOUT 5 MI AWAY. I CALLED TFC AT 3 MI AND AT 1 MI AS THE VFR ACFT SHOWED 7100' AT 3 MI AND 7000' AT 1 MI. MY ACFT SAID HE SAW THE VFR TFC GO BY AT 200-300' SEPARATION. FOR SOME REASON THE VFR CONFLICT ALERT NEVER ACTIVATED. IF IT DID, I MAY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CALL THE TFC SOONER. IN ANY CASE, THE SEE-AND-AVOID CONCEPT SEEMED TO HAVE FAILED. THE SMALL SHAPES OF THE 2 ACFT IN A HEAD-ON SITUATION MUST NOT GIVE VERY MUCH ADVANCE WARNING OF THE IMPENDING NEAR MISS. I BELIEVE OUR REPRESENTATION OF VFR ACFT IS NOT AS GOOD AS IT USED TO BE ON OUR RADAR SCOPE. IT SEEMS MUCH HARDER TO NOTICE THE V (ESPECIALLY WITH NO MODE C INVOLVED) THAN IT WAS TO NOTICE THE SQUAWK CODE. THEY MADE THE CHANGE TO REDUCE CLUTTER, BUT I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH CLUTTER, AND I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE ELSE IN THE CENTER ENVIRONMENT DID EITHER. IT'S JUST HARDER FOR US TO NOTICE THE VFR'S NOW. WHICH IS MORE DANGEROUS.

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