Air carrier on descent overtakes a second air carrier who become upset at close proximity.

Attributes
ACN	168863
Time
Date	199101
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	0001 To 0600
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : anc
State Reference	AK
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zan
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent other
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 13000
ASRS Report	168863
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

On descent into anc, ATC had not specified which of 2 large transport's was #1 for the airport. Air carrier B flight XXX, who was initially in front of us at cruise was now behind us. ATC gave us no speed restriction, heading or altitude changes in our course. The air carrier B flight then reported that he was behind us and very close (on descent, though not close enough to file a report, so he claimed). In any case, air carrier B later, over center frequency, claimed that we had been incompetent and unprofessional, and had not followed ATC instructions. We followed instructions to the letter, and I verified this with zan when I called them on the ground. We were air carrier Z flight, fai-anc. Again we asked zan if we had ignored anything or any instructions, or violated any rules. They replied no. There was indecision involved, but not by us.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR ON DESCENT OVERTAKES A SECOND ACR WHO BECOME UPSET AT CLOSE PROX.

Narrative: ON DSNT INTO ANC, ATC HAD NOT SPECIFIED WHICH OF 2 LGT'S WAS #1 FOR THE ARPT. ACR B FLT XXX, WHO WAS INITIALLY IN FRONT OF US AT CRUISE WAS NOW BEHIND US. ATC GAVE US NO SPD RESTRICTION, HDG OR ALT CHANGES IN OUR COURSE. THE ACR B FLT THEN RPTED THAT HE WAS BEHIND US AND VERY CLOSE (ON DSNT, THOUGH NOT CLOSE ENOUGH TO FILE A RPT, SO HE CLAIMED). IN ANY CASE, ACR B LATER, OVER CENTER FREQ, CLAIMED THAT WE HAD BEEN INCOMPETENT AND UNPROFESSIONAL, AND HAD NOT FOLLOWED ATC INSTRUCTIONS. WE FOLLOWED INSTRUCTIONS TO THE LETTER, AND I VERIFIED THIS WITH ZAN WHEN I CALLED THEM ON THE GND. WE WERE ACR Z FLT, FAI-ANC. AGAIN WE ASKED ZAN IF WE HAD IGNORED ANYTHING OR ANY INSTRUCTIONS, OR VIOLATED ANY RULES. THEY REPLIED NO. THERE WAS INDECISION INVOLVED, BUT NOT BY US.

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.