Narrative:

After departing runway 23 at mmu on mmu 6 departure procedure (dp); I contacted new york departure control and reported climbing 1200 for 2000. New york acknowledged and asked if we had traffic to our right side at approximately 2000. I acknowledged seeing the traffic; at which time ATC issued a right turn to heading 110 with climb to 10000. Knowing that the mmu 6 departure has a left turn to 160 as published; this revised ATC clearance could pose a possible conflict with target aircraft insight so I queried ATC again and ATC response was turn right to 110 and climb and maintain 10000. The PIC and I looked at our position in relation to other aircraft and decided we could comply with the ATC clearance while maintaining visual separation with other aircraft. We anticipated receiving a TCAS alert and RA; which we did momentarily and complied with the RA while maintaining a visual on target aircraft; and subsequently received a level off alert due to another aircraft later pointed out by ATC to our left; which was most likely ewr outbound traffic. All TCAS RA alerts cleared; and by this time; we were well above and away from initial target and ewr traffic and heading 110 while climbing to 10000 and informed ATC. ATC acknowledged saying we were supposed to turn left; not right to a heading of 110 at which time we were given a frequency change and proceeded uneventfully.I refrained from questioning ATC`s remarks on right turn versus left turn due to traffic volume and frequency congestion. The PIC and I both heard and confirmed ATC's right turn request from initial call and when queried for a second time as well. The fact that ATC knew traffic was to our right and asked if we had a visual on him points to the fact that his intentions were for us to make a right turn and not a left turn. Contributing factors: asking crew to amend a dp; and knowingly putting our aircraft in a compromising position; when obviously staying on the dp; or making a left turn would have avoided this situation. ATC apparently not seeming to know left from right at initial point of contact. Confusion due to initial target traffic; and mmu 6 dp. Action taken: compliance with TCAS RA alerts while maintaining safe visual separation from initial target aircraft and subsequent aircraft pointed out by ATC.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DA2000 Captain reported they were vectored off the SID with a right turn to an assigned heading toward traffic that had been previously pointed out and acknowledged. He questioned ATC about the direction of turn and was told a second time to turn right. The crew complied with the instruction; received a RA; complied with the RA; and then they were told by ATC that the turn was supposed to be to the left.

Narrative: After departing runway 23 at MMU on MMU 6 Departure Procedure (DP); I contacted New York departure control and reported climbing 1200 for 2000. New York acknowledged and asked if we had traffic to our right side at approximately 2000. I acknowledged seeing the traffic; at which time ATC issued a right turn to heading 110 with climb to 10000. Knowing that the MMU 6 departure has a left turn to 160 as published; this revised ATC clearance could pose a possible conflict with target aircraft insight so I queried ATC again and ATC response was turn right to 110 and climb and maintain 10000. The PIC and I looked at our position in relation to other aircraft and decided we could comply with the ATC clearance while maintaining visual separation with other aircraft. We anticipated receiving a TCAS alert and RA; which we did momentarily and complied with the RA while maintaining a visual on target aircraft; and subsequently received a level off alert due to another aircraft later pointed out by ATC to our left; which was most likely EWR outbound traffic. All TCAS RA alerts cleared; and by this time; we were well above and away from initial target and EWR traffic and heading 110 while climbing to 10000 and informed ATC. ATC acknowledged saying we were supposed to turn left; not right to a heading of 110 at which time we were given a frequency change and proceeded uneventfully.I refrained from questioning ATC`s remarks on right turn versus left turn due to traffic volume and frequency congestion. The PIC and I both heard and confirmed ATC's right turn request from initial call and when queried for a second time as well. The fact that ATC knew traffic was to our right and asked if we had a visual on him points to the fact that his intentions were for us to make a right turn and not a left turn. Contributing Factors: Asking crew to amend a DP; and knowingly putting our aircraft in a compromising position; when obviously staying on the DP; or making a left turn would have avoided this situation. ATC apparently not seeming to know left from right at initial point of contact. Confusion due to initial target traffic; and MMU 6 DP. Action Taken: Compliance with TCAS RA alerts while maintaining safe visual separation from initial target aircraft and subsequent aircraft pointed out by ATC.

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.