Narrative:

Air carrier X was inbound to phl on the bucks 2 arrival, was informed of traffic at 10500 ft over lrp. As aircraft was sighted by PNF, a RA was issued by the TCASII commanding a climb greater than 1500 FPM. Center was informed that air carrier X was in a climb in response to a RA and that the previously called traffic was in sight. The controller then started to ask numerous questions which demonstrated his understanding of the TCASII system was drastically different than that which this pilot was taught and is that which is contained in applicable directives. Specifically the controller asked: 1) if we were responding to the TCASII even though we had the aircraft Y in sight? Company manuals dictate that RA will be followed unless doing so would put the flight in danger. 2) if we had more than one RA? I understand that that exceeds the capabilities of the system. 3) was the called traffic the traffic causing the RA? I am not aware that visual and traffic displayed on the TCASII can be positively correlated. Bottom line: controller sounded like he was conducting an inquisition and knew little of the system he was talking about.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X TCASII RA WITH ACFT Y. ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC UNAUTHORIZED CLB FROM ASSIGNED ALT. PLTDEV.

Narrative: ACR X WAS INBOUND TO PHL ON THE BUCKS 2 ARR, WAS INFORMED OF TFC AT 10500 FT OVER LRP. AS ACFT WAS SIGHTED BY PNF, A RA WAS ISSUED BY THE TCASII COMMANDING A CLB GREATER THAN 1500 FPM. CTR WAS INFORMED THAT ACR X WAS IN A CLB IN RESPONSE TO A RA AND THAT THE PREVIOUSLY CALLED TFC WAS IN SIGHT. THE CTLR THEN STARTED TO ASK NUMEROUS QUESTIONS WHICH DEMONSTRATED HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE TCASII SYS WAS DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT THAN THAT WHICH THIS PLT WAS TAUGHT AND IS THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN APPLICABLE DIRECTIVES. SPECIFICALLY THE CTLR ASKED: 1) IF WE WERE RESPONDING TO THE TCASII EVEN THOUGH WE HAD THE ACFT Y IN SIGHT? COMPANY MANUALS DICTATE THAT RA WILL BE FOLLOWED UNLESS DOING SO WOULD PUT THE FLT IN DANGER. 2) IF WE HAD MORE THAN ONE RA? I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT EXCEEDS THE CAPABILITIES OF THE SYS. 3) WAS THE CALLED TFC THE TFC CAUSING THE RA? I AM NOT AWARE THAT VISUAL AND TFC DISPLAYED ON THE TCASII CAN BE POSITIVELY CORRELATED. BOTTOM LINE: CTLR SOUNDED LIKE HE WAS CONDUCTING AN INQUISITION AND KNEW LITTLE OF THE SYS HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.

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.