Narrative:

En route from ont to hnl on pom #4 SID from ont, level 14000' awaiting further climb clearance, approximately 30 DME northwest pom VOR, 300 KIAS. At approximately PM18Z, ZLA gave us a traffic advisory of VFR traffic at 14500', 12 O'clock position, 6 mi, and he asked us to report when we had it in sight. I reported 'no contact.' ATC then advised the other aircraft that he had heavy transport traffic (our aircraft) that would be climbing through his altitude. The VFR traffic advised that he did not have us in sight, either. ATC reported the traffic to us again at about 2 mi and a 1 O'clock position. I sighted traffic in my 1 O'clock position; however, I could not yet tell his distance, the aircraft type or size, its direction of flight, its relative speed, or the sep that we would have if we each maintained our present tracks. I reported 'traffic in sight,' assuming that ATC would give us climb clearance after we passed the traffic. ATC immediately cleared us to climb to a higher altitude. Observing that we would be past the VFR traffic in approximately 20-30 seconds, I told ATC that I would prefer to maintain 14000' until 'clear of the traffic.' ATC suddenly instructed me to 'reverse course to the left and maintain 14000'.' I asked, 'what's going on?', and ATC,, now agitated, said that he had told me that I was 'well clear' of the other traffic, and that it was now passing about 1 mi off my right wing. ATC had, in fact, never told me what latitude sep I would have, and I never heard the other aircraft report us in sight until we were almost abeam each other. ATC then cancelled the instructions to 'reverse course' and told me he was going to report a deviation. He also said he was going to give me a phone # to call, but he never passed that information. Shortly thereafter, we had a frequency change. The remainder of the flight to hnl was routine. My request to stay at 14000' until clear of the VFR traffic at 14500' was strictly in the interest of safety. The other aircraft did not report our heavy transport in sight until we were within 1-2 mi. I felt that maintaining the 500' vertical sep was far more prudent than trying to maintain visibility sep with a small VFR target while climbing through his altitude, especially since I could not readily evaluate his relative track and whether he was maintaining a steady heading. ATC appeared to be rushing our climb past the VFR aircraft and was upset that I preferred to wait until we were well clear. In today's crowded airspace and complex cockpits, there is no need to force a compromise of sep standards between IFR and VFR aircraft. We are simply moving too fast and are all too busy.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POTENTIAL CONFLICT BETWEEN AN IFR DEP TRAFFIC AND CROSSING TRAFFIC VFR.

Narrative: ENRTE FROM ONT TO HNL ON POM #4 SID FROM ONT, LEVEL 14000' AWAITING FURTHER CLB CLRNC, APPROX 30 DME NW POM VOR, 300 KIAS. AT APPROX PM18Z, ZLA GAVE US A TFC ADVISORY OF VFR TFC AT 14500', 12 O'CLOCK POS, 6 MI, AND HE ASKED US TO RPT WHEN WE HAD IT IN SIGHT. I RPTED 'NO CONTACT.' ATC THEN ADVISED THE OTHER ACFT THAT HE HAD HVT TFC (OUR ACFT) THAT WOULD BE CLBING THROUGH HIS ALT. THE VFR TFC ADVISED THAT HE DID NOT HAVE US IN SIGHT, EITHER. ATC RPTED THE TFC TO US AGAIN AT ABOUT 2 MI AND A 1 O'CLOCK POS. I SIGHTED TFC IN MY 1 O'CLOCK POS; HOWEVER, I COULD NOT YET TELL HIS DISTANCE, THE ACFT TYPE OR SIZE, ITS DIRECTION OF FLT, ITS RELATIVE SPD, OR THE SEP THAT WE WOULD HAVE IF WE EACH MAINTAINED OUR PRESENT TRACKS. I RPTED 'TFC IN SIGHT,' ASSUMING THAT ATC WOULD GIVE US CLB CLRNC AFTER WE PASSED THE TFC. ATC IMMEDIATELY CLRED US TO CLB TO A HIGHER ALT. OBSERVING THAT WE WOULD BE PAST THE VFR TFC IN APPROX 20-30 SECS, I TOLD ATC THAT I WOULD PREFER TO MAINTAIN 14000' UNTIL 'CLR OF THE TFC.' ATC SUDDENLY INSTRUCTED ME TO 'REVERSE COURSE TO THE LEFT AND MAINTAIN 14000'.' I ASKED, 'WHAT'S GOING ON?', AND ATC,, NOW AGITATED, SAID THAT HE HAD TOLD ME THAT I WAS 'WELL CLR' OF THE OTHER TFC, AND THAT IT WAS NOW PASSING ABOUT 1 MI OFF MY RIGHT WING. ATC HAD, IN FACT, NEVER TOLD ME WHAT LAT SEP I WOULD HAVE, AND I NEVER HEARD THE OTHER ACFT RPT US IN SIGHT UNTIL WE WERE ALMOST ABEAM EACH OTHER. ATC THEN CANCELLED THE INSTRUCTIONS TO 'REVERSE COURSE' AND TOLD ME HE WAS GOING TO RPT A DEVIATION. HE ALSO SAID HE WAS GOING TO GIVE ME A PHONE # TO CALL, BUT HE NEVER PASSED THAT INFO. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE HAD A FREQ CHANGE. THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT TO HNL WAS ROUTINE. MY REQUEST TO STAY AT 14000' UNTIL CLR OF THE VFR TFC AT 14500' WAS STRICTLY IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY. THE OTHER ACFT DID NOT RPT OUR HVT IN SIGHT UNTIL WE WERE WITHIN 1-2 MI. I FELT THAT MAINTAINING THE 500' VERT SEP WAS FAR MORE PRUDENT THAN TRYING TO MAINTAIN VIS SEP WITH A SMALL VFR TARGET WHILE CLBING THROUGH HIS ALT, ESPECIALLY SINCE I COULD NOT READILY EVALUATE HIS RELATIVE TRACK AND WHETHER HE WAS MAINTAINING A STEADY HDG. ATC APPEARED TO BE RUSHING OUR CLB PAST THE VFR ACFT AND WAS UPSET THAT I PREFERRED TO WAIT UNTIL WE WERE WELL CLR. IN TODAY'S CROWDED AIRSPACE AND COMPLEX COCKPITS, THERE IS NO NEED TO FORCE A COMPROMISE OF SEP STANDARDS BTWN IFR AND VFR ACFT. WE ARE SIMPLY MOVING TOO FAST AND ARE ALL TOO BUSY.

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.