Narrative:

Air carrier X, in the climb (climbing to 12000 ft), at 8000 we received a TCASII TA, (traffic, traffic). The aircraft was 10 mi at 1 O'clock level at 9500 ft. Traffic was not in sight. Continuing the climb, at 9000 ft, TCASII said 'monitor vertical speed.' I was hand flying the aircraft with the autothrottles engaged. I lowered the nose to the green arc (200-300 FPM climb). At that time the TA changed to RA and instructed us to stop the climb 'don't climb.' I followed the TCASII information and we both looked for the traffic. At this time mco departure cleared us to a higher altitude and the captain told him we were reacting to a RA. Departure then said 'oh yeah I'm showing traffic at 12:30 1/2 mi, you want to maintain 9000 ft.' seeing the traffic, which was level at 9500 ft (we were at about 8900 ft), we knew we were now clear. I looked down at the airspeed and we were accelerating past 290 KTS. I disengaged the autothrottles and brought the throttles back to idle. Although I don't think there would have been a mid air had we not begun a descent, we would have passed the traffic with an unsafe amount of spacing. I also feel that in this scenario, the autothrottle system is demonstrating another design flaw. It would seem if you were in 'EPR climb' and the airplane began a descent the autothrottles should automatically revert to 'speed select' which would have solved the speed problem we encountered.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X TCASII TA RA EVASIVE ACTION TAKEN STOP CLB HAD CONFLICT WITH ACFT Y IN TCA. ACR X FAR SPD VIOLATION BELOW 10000 FT. PLTDEV.

Narrative: ACR X, IN THE CLB (CLBING TO 12000 FT), AT 8000 WE RECEIVED A TCASII TA, (TFC, TFC). THE ACFT WAS 10 MI AT 1 O'CLOCK LEVEL AT 9500 FT. TFC WAS NOT IN SIGHT. CONTINUING THE CLB, AT 9000 FT, TCASII SAID 'MONITOR VERT SPD.' I WAS HAND FLYING THE ACFT WITH THE AUTOTHROTTLES ENGAGED. I LOWERED THE NOSE TO THE GREEN ARC (200-300 FPM CLB). AT THAT TIME THE TA CHANGED TO RA AND INSTRUCTED US TO STOP THE CLB 'DON'T CLB.' I FOLLOWED THE TCASII INFO AND WE BOTH LOOKED FOR THE TFC. AT THIS TIME MCO DEP CLRED US TO A HIGHER ALT AND THE CAPT TOLD HIM WE WERE REACTING TO A RA. DEP THEN SAID 'OH YEAH I'M SHOWING TFC AT 12:30 1/2 MI, YOU WANT TO MAINTAIN 9000 FT.' SEEING THE TFC, WHICH WAS LEVEL AT 9500 FT (WE WERE AT ABOUT 8900 FT), WE KNEW WE WERE NOW CLR. I LOOKED DOWN AT THE AIRSPD AND WE WERE ACCELERATING PAST 290 KTS. I DISENGAGED THE AUTOTHROTTLES AND BROUGHT THE THROTTLES BACK TO IDLE. ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A MID AIR HAD WE NOT BEGUN A DSCNT, WE WOULD HAVE PASSED THE TFC WITH AN UNSAFE AMOUNT OF SPACING. I ALSO FEEL THAT IN THIS SCENARIO, THE AUTOTHROTTLE SYS IS DEMONSTRATING ANOTHER DESIGN FLAW. IT WOULD SEEM IF YOU WERE IN 'EPR CLB' AND THE AIRPLANE BEGAN A DSCNT THE AUTOTHROTTLES SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY REVERT TO 'SPD SELECT' WHICH WOULD HAVE SOLVED THE SPD PROBLEM WE ENCOUNTERED.

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.