Narrative:

During departure; at approximately 8;000 feet while climbing to 10;000 feet on a 50 degree heading; ATC issued a traffic advisory for a meridian aircraft at our eleven o'clock position at 10;500 ft. We identified the aircraft on our TCAS and simultaneously informed ATC that we were IMC. Upon further assessment we determined that we were potentially on a collision course with said aircraft and requested a turn to 70 degrees. ATC granted our request and subsequently received a request from the meridian to 'orbit' at its current position. Upon leveling at 10;000 ft; we were intermittent VFR/IMC conditions. At this time we obtained visual with the meridian and maintained reference to TCAS; which continued to indicate potential aircraft convergence. Additionally; at this time the aircraft indicated 10;400 ft. At this point we received an RA lasting several seconds and concluding with an aural 'clear of conflict.' within seconds; as the meridian continued its orbit and began chasing our aircraft while in its turn; we received a second RA. Seconds later; we received a second aural 'clear of conflict.'during the evolution of this event (approximately 30 seconds); the ATC controller received several indications from our flight that should have heightened his/her safety concern for potential aircraft conflict. These indications included: -our announcing IMC conditions when given traffic advisory.-our request to a 70 degree heading to avoid aircraft conflict.despite our articulated concerns; ATC issued a clearance to the meridian to orbit as requested - this; as we continued to converge with the meridian.upon the completion of our second RA; we informed ATC of our serious concerns for what had just happened. The ATC controller appeared to be very defensive of his/her actions in controlling [the] meridian. In fact; several times; the controller articulated that his clearances with the meridian were perfectly legal. We questioned his authorization of the meridian's orbit when in such close proximity to our aircraft. We were still met with the controller's defensiveness and rationalization that his/her clearance was 'perfectly legal.' in fact; the ATC controller appeared to be cavalier with his/her actions. We concluded our articulated concerns with a statement that what had just occurred was 'ridiculous.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B777 Captain reported he was uncomfortable with ATC handling of his flight in IMC conditions that was conflicting with a light aircraft.

Narrative: During departure; at approximately 8;000 feet while climbing to 10;000 feet on a 50 degree heading; ATC issued a traffic advisory for a Meridian aircraft at our eleven o'clock position at 10;500 FT. We identified the aircraft on our TCAS and simultaneously informed ATC that we were IMC. Upon further assessment we determined that we were potentially on a collision course with said aircraft and requested a turn to 70 degrees. ATC granted our request and subsequently received a request from the Meridian to 'orbit' at its current position. Upon leveling at 10;000 FT; we were intermittent VFR/IMC conditions. At this time we obtained visual with the Meridian and maintained reference to TCAS; which continued to indicate potential aircraft convergence. Additionally; at this time the aircraft indicated 10;400 FT. At this point we received an RA lasting several seconds and concluding with an aural 'clear of conflict.' Within seconds; as the Meridian continued its orbit and began chasing our aircraft while in its turn; we received a second RA. Seconds later; we received a second aural 'clear of conflict.'During the evolution of this event (approximately 30 seconds); the ATC Controller received several indications from our flight that should have heightened his/her safety concern for potential aircraft conflict. These indications included: -our announcing IMC conditions when given traffic advisory.-our request to a 70 degree heading to avoid aircraft conflict.Despite our articulated concerns; ATC issued a clearance to the Meridian to orbit as requested - this; as we continued to converge with the Meridian.Upon the completion of our second RA; we informed ATC of our serious concerns for what had just happened. The ATC Controller appeared to be very defensive of his/her actions in controlling [the] Meridian. In fact; several times; the Controller articulated that his clearances with the Meridian were perfectly legal. We questioned his authorization of the Meridian's orbit when in such close proximity to our aircraft. We were still met with the controller's defensiveness and rationalization that his/her clearance was 'perfectly legal.' In fact; the ATC Controller appeared to be cavalier with his/her actions. We concluded our articulated concerns with a statement that what had just occurred was 'ridiculous.'

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.