Narrative:

I was the pilot flying on the visual approach to runway 15 at ase (aspen; colorado); tracking the localizer inbound. Tower had just cleared a takeoff from runway 33 (note: this is standard procedure at ase).typically aircraft departing runway 33 while traffic is inbound to runway 15 will be assigned to fly the lindz departure; which requires the departing aircraft to turn north to heading 343 until reaching 9100 MSL; then turning west. In my experience operating at ase; this should provide a healthy separation between aircraft.on our arrival on Y/xx/2020; the departing aircraft tracked outbound along our extended centerline; as opposed to passing off our left and above us which the lindz procedure requires. We saw the aircraft on our TCAS display but never saw it visually. The TCAS display showed the aircraft within 300' of our altitude and merging with our position. I took evasive action and flew to the right of centerline and dipped below the PAPI (4 red lights). I believe the conflicting aircraft either didn't fly heading 343 after departure; and/or had such a poor climb rate that they were unable to climb above our final approach path on the PAPI.I suggest that ATC develop a dp with an initial waypoint to the north of the runway 15 final approach path; to reduce the potential for departing aircraft to track outbound on the final approach path. Perhaps this could be a day-VMC-only procedure which will reduce the potential for mid-air collisions without increasing the risk of terrain collisions. The FAA could clarify that this is okay for 135 operators who are required to depart with an active IFR clearance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Captain reported conflict at ASE between traffic arriving and departing from opposite directions.

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying on the visual approach to RWY 15 at ASE (Aspen; Colorado); tracking the localizer inbound. Tower had just cleared a takeoff from RWY 33 (note: this is standard procedure at ASE).Typically aircraft departing RWY 33 while traffic is inbound to RWY 15 will be assigned to fly the LINDZ departure; which requires the departing aircraft to turn north to heading 343 until reaching 9100 MSL; then turning west. In my experience operating at ASE; this should provide a healthy separation between aircraft.On our arrival on Y/XX/2020; the departing aircraft tracked outbound along our extended centerline; as opposed to passing off our left and above us which the LINDZ procedure requires. We saw the aircraft on our TCAS display but never saw it visually. The TCAS display showed the aircraft within 300' of our altitude and merging with our position. I took evasive action and flew to the right of centerline and dipped below the PAPI (4 red lights). I believe the conflicting aircraft either didn't fly heading 343 after departure; and/or had such a poor climb rate that they were unable to climb above our final approach path on the PAPI.I suggest that ATC develop a DP with an initial waypoint to the north of the RWY 15 final approach path; to reduce the potential for departing aircraft to track outbound on the final approach path. Perhaps this could be a Day-VMC-only procedure which will reduce the potential for mid-air collisions without increasing the risk of terrain collisions. The FAA could clarify that this is okay for 135 operators who are required to depart with an active IFR clearance.

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.