Flight crew responds to TCASII RA in altitude deviation altitude excursion.

Attributes
ACN	214154
Time
Date	199206
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : dfw
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 6700
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : dfw tower : dfw
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	cruise other descent : approach landing : missed approach
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other descent : approach
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 1000
ASRS Report	214154
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 3000 flight time type : 300
ASRS Report	214152
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude conflict : nmac non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	horizontal : 200 vertical : 100
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation Operational Error
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

A missed approach during day VFR conditions was executed because the runway was not clear. Missed approach clearance was to climb to 3000 ft MSL with runway heading (dfw airport -- 18R) from tower. We switched to approach control and was given a heading of 260 degrees and a climb to 5000 ft MSL. Once level 5000 ft heading 260, we received a traffic warning from TCASII, followed by a RA to climb, followed by increase climb. The climb was immediately initiated with maximum power. The climb was stopped at 6700 ft MSL with a clear of traffic from TCASII. Altitude advisory on TCASII showed at one point that the aircraft was within 100 ft and slightly behind us at about 4-5 O'clock position. I feel that the first mistake by the tower of crossing aircraft ahead of landing aircraft should be reviewed by the tower operators, and procedures for handling go around traffic at dfw airport is extremely dangerous and lacking in procedures. Supplemental information from acn 214152: this TA was our 4-5 O'clock position at 600 ft lower climbing. Just prior to TA, I heard an aircraft (female voice) say that traffic was no longer in sight due to clouds (I believe we were their traffic). After approximately 5 seconds, an 'increase climb' call came from TCASII and captain increased nose attitude and thrust to approximately firewall. After a 'clear of conflict' came from TCASII, we leveled at 6700 ft MSL and made 3 calls to ATC of this fact -- the last call was finally acknowledged (frequency was very busy). We were told by ATC to maintain 6000 ft. Comments: I feel the dfw complex is so crowded that in a case like this (VFR, but layers developing) the ATC folks can easily get overloaded should an aircraft have to go around. We had to request an altitude/heading on go around -- this information was not given immediately to us. Is ATC equipped (spring-loaded) to handle 1 more aircraft in an already saturated environment? Although rare, procedures used to be established for VFR go around procedures at busy airports to prevent something like what happened today.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC RESPONDS TO TCASII RA IN ALTDEV ALT EXCURSION.

Narrative: A MISSED APCH DURING DAY VFR CONDITIONS WAS EXECUTED BECAUSE THE RWY WAS NOT CLR. MISSED APCH CLRNC WAS TO CLB TO 3000 FT MSL WITH RWY HDG (DFW ARPT -- 18R) FROM TWR. WE SWITCHED TO APCH CTL AND WAS GIVEN A HDG OF 260 DEGS AND A CLB TO 5000 FT MSL. ONCE LEVEL 5000 FT HDG 260, WE RECEIVED A TFC WARNING FROM TCASII, FOLLOWED BY A RA TO CLB, FOLLOWED BY INCREASE CLB. THE CLB WAS IMMEDIATELY INITIATED WITH MAX PWR. THE CLB WAS STOPPED AT 6700 FT MSL WITH A CLR OF TFC FROM TCASII. ALT ADVISORY ON TCASII SHOWED AT ONE POINT THAT THE ACFT WAS WITHIN 100 FT AND SLIGHTLY BEHIND US AT ABOUT 4-5 O'CLOCK POS. I FEEL THAT THE FIRST MISTAKE BY THE TWR OF XING ACFT AHEAD OF LNDG ACFT SHOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE TWR OPERATORS, AND PROCS FOR HANDLING GAR TFC AT DFW ARPT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND LACKING IN PROCS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 214152: THIS TA WAS OUR 4-5 O'CLOCK POS AT 600 FT LOWER CLBING. JUST PRIOR TO TA, I HEARD AN ACFT (FEMALE VOICE) SAY THAT TFC WAS NO LONGER IN SIGHT DUE TO CLOUDS (I BELIEVE WE WERE THEIR TFC). AFTER APPROX 5 SECONDS, AN 'INCREASE CLB' CALL CAME FROM TCASII AND CAPT INCREASED NOSE ATTITUDE AND THRUST TO APPROX FIREWALL. AFTER A 'CLR OF CONFLICT' CAME FROM TCASII, WE LEVELED AT 6700 FT MSL AND MADE 3 CALLS TO ATC OF THIS FACT -- THE LAST CALL WAS FINALLY ACKNOWLEDGED (FREQ WAS VERY BUSY). WE WERE TOLD BY ATC TO MAINTAIN 6000 FT. COMMENTS: I FEEL THE DFW COMPLEX IS SO CROWDED THAT IN A CASE LIKE THIS (VFR, BUT LAYERS DEVELOPING) THE ATC FOLKS CAN EASILY GET OVERLOADED SHOULD AN ACFT HAVE TO GAR. WE HAD TO REQUEST AN ALT/HDG ON GAR -- THIS INFO WAS NOT GIVEN IMMEDIATELY TO US. IS ATC EQUIPPED (SPRING-LOADED) TO HANDLE 1 MORE ACFT IN AN ALREADY SATURATED ENVIRONMENT? ALTHOUGH RARE, PROCS USED TO BE ESTABLISHED FOR VFR GAR PROCS AT BUSY ARPTS TO PREVENT SOMETHING LIKE WHAT HAPPENED TODAY.

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.