Narrative:

Contacted clt approach west of clt approximately 25 mi. Advised through 10000 ft climbing to 11500. Requested VFR flight following eastbound to ewn. Received squawk code (and complied with identify I think). At 10700 ft clt advised 6 O'clock traffic overtaking me at 11000 ft. Clt control did not provide distance between targets. Thusly, I requested distance. Clt replied 1 mi. Since clt advised traffic was above my altitude of 10700, I elected to take evasive action and dive. Moments later, I observe an air carrier medium large transport in a diving turn passing my 3 O'clock (right wing). Air carrier asked clt 'what about this traffic.' clt replied 'the only observed traffic is off your left wing at 1 mi.' air carrier said, 'we had to dive to miss him.' clt then advised air carrier of frequency change. Clt advised me of frequency change. I then filed IFR and continued to destination. Clt had not advised me of 'radar contact' but had to have contact to call 6 O'clock traffic. Since clt allows no IFR overflt, the tendency to fly over VFR is greater because the IFR vectors around waste so much fuel and time. The controller was very busy. Sector size should be smaller. The near miss distance is unknown to me due to the rear approach of the air carrier jet. Collision may have occurred due to inadequate warning of traffic by approach if air carrier and I had not taken evasive action. Incident would not have occurred if clt allowed IFR overflts because I would have been a known factor much earlier in the scenario.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLOSE PROX ACR-MLG GA-SMA ABOVE CLT TCA.

Narrative: CONTACTED CLT APCH W OF CLT APPROX 25 MI. ADVISED THROUGH 10000 FT CLBING TO 11500. REQUESTED VFR FLT FOLLOWING EBOUND TO EWN. RECEIVED SQUAWK CODE (AND COMPLIED WITH IDENT I THINK). AT 10700 FT CLT ADVISED 6 O'CLOCK TFC OVERTAKING ME AT 11000 FT. CLT CTL DID NOT PROVIDE DISTANCE BTWN TARGETS. THUSLY, I REQUESTED DISTANCE. CLT REPLIED 1 MI. SINCE CLT ADVISED TFC WAS ABOVE MY ALT OF 10700, I ELECTED TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION AND DIVE. MOMENTS LATER, I OBSERVE AN ACR MLG IN A DIVING TURN PASSING MY 3 O'CLOCK (R WING). ACR ASKED CLT 'WHAT ABOUT THIS TFC.' CLT REPLIED 'THE ONLY OBSERVED TFC IS OFF YOUR L WING AT 1 MI.' ACR SAID, 'WE HAD TO DIVE TO MISS HIM.' CLT THEN ADVISED ACR OF FREQ CHANGE. CLT ADVISED ME OF FREQ CHANGE. I THEN FILED IFR AND CONTINUED TO DEST. CLT HAD NOT ADVISED ME OF 'RADAR CONTACT' BUT HAD TO HAVE CONTACT TO CALL 6 O'CLOCK TFC. SINCE CLT ALLOWS NO IFR OVERFLT, THE TENDENCY TO FLY OVER VFR IS GREATER BECAUSE THE IFR VECTORS AROUND WASTE SO MUCH FUEL AND TIME. THE CTLR WAS VERY BUSY. SECTOR SIZE SHOULD BE SMALLER. THE NEAR MISS DISTANCE IS UNKNOWN TO ME DUE TO THE REAR APCH OF THE ACR JET. COLLISION MAY HAVE OCCURRED DUE TO INADEQUATE WARNING OF TFC BY APCH IF ACR AND I HAD NOT TAKEN EVASIVE ACTION. INCIDENT WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED IF CLT ALLOWED IFR OVERFLTS BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE BEEN A KNOWN FACTOR MUCH EARLIER IN THE SCENARIO.

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.