Altitude deviation altitude excursion in flight crew response to TCASII RA. PIC complains of any need for climb command as he had slowed descent rate to 500 FPM.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	253316
Time
Date	199309
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : etx airport : abe
State Reference	PA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 8000 msl bound upper : 8500
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : fll
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors enroute airway : abe
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time total : 12000
ASRS Report	253316
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 15000 vertical : 700
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Descending to 8000 ft on a heading of 130 degrees, abe approach control advised us of traffic at 12 O'clock and 5 NM at 7500 ft. I slowed my rate of descent to about 500 FPM and as we passed 8200 ft, the TCASII commanded a climb immediately after giving us a TA. The TCASII target showed a constant minus 07 as we stopped our descent and climbed back up to 8500 ft. After the conflict cleared, we descended back down to down to 8000 ft. Given our vertical separation and shallow rate of descent, I do not think that the TCASII should have given us a climb command. Present TCASII modes (giving vertical commands) cause more problems -- traffic and airspace wise -- than should be acceptable! A turn would have been far better than changing altitude. This TCASII system should not have been rammed into operation! We should have waited for tcasiii utilizing turns first before using altitude changes which cause further traffic conflicts and airspace infringement.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALTDEV ALT EXCURSION IN FLC RESPONSE TO TCASII RA. PIC COMPLAINS OF ANY NEED FOR CLB COMMAND AS HE HAD SLOWED DSCNT RATE TO 500 FPM.

Narrative: DSNDING TO 8000 FT ON A HDG OF 130 DEGS, ABE APCH CTL ADVISED US OF TFC AT 12 O'CLOCK AND 5 NM AT 7500 FT. I SLOWED MY RATE OF DSCNT TO ABOUT 500 FPM AND AS WE PASSED 8200 FT, THE TCASII COMMANDED A CLB IMMEDIATELY AFTER GIVING US A TA. THE TCASII TARGET SHOWED A CONSTANT MINUS 07 AS WE STOPPED OUR DSCNT AND CLBED BACK UP TO 8500 FT. AFTER THE CONFLICT CLRED, WE DSNDED BACK DOWN TO DOWN TO 8000 FT. GIVEN OUR VERT SEPARATION AND SHALLOW RATE OF DSCNT, I DO NOT THINK THAT THE TCASII SHOULD HAVE GIVEN US A CLB COMMAND. PRESENT TCASII MODES (GIVING VERT COMMANDS) CAUSE MORE PROBS -- TFC AND AIRSPACE WISE -- THAN SHOULD BE ACCEPTABLE! A TURN WOULD HAVE BEEN FAR BETTER THAN CHANGING ALT. THIS TCASII SYS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RAMMED INTO OP! WE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR TCASIII UTILIZING TURNS FIRST BEFORE USING ALT CHANGES WHICH CAUSE FURTHER TFC CONFLICTS AND AIRSPACE INFRINGEMENT.

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.