Narrative:

My aircraft flight X cleared for takeoff on runway 36R at dfw. At about 700 AGL, tower gave flight X a heading of 350 degrees. Simultaneously, flight X received TCASII warning to 'reduce climb.' about 800-1000 ft AGL, flight Y came directly abeam the cockpit left side, co-altitude, with about 150 ft horizontal separation: again, tower controller issued instructions to fly heading of 350 degrees for flight X. I did not comply with tower's instructions as this would have reduced separation with flight Y about 1000-1200 ft AGL, flight Y began a left bank turn and began to increase horizontal separation. Analysis: flight Y was executing a go around from runway 36L at the time of the incident because of an aircraft on the runway. Tower controller, (in my view) caused the situation to occur for following reasons: 1) too little separation between aircraft landing on runway 36L led to a need for flight Y to go around. 2) once flight Y initiated go around, tower did not issue instructions to insure separation between flight Y on the go and flight X on takeoff. 3) tower compounded the problem by issuing instructions (left heading 350 degree) to flight X which would have increased the conflict. Had I complied with those instructions, it could have resulted in a mid-air collision.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NMAC AND TCASII DURING TKOF.

Narrative: MY ACFT FLT X CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 36R AT DFW. AT ABOUT 700 AGL, TWR GAVE FLT X A HDG OF 350 DEGS. SIMULTANEOUSLY, FLT X RECEIVED TCASII WARNING TO 'REDUCE CLB.' ABOUT 800-1000 FT AGL, FLT Y CAME DIRECTLY ABEAM THE COCKPIT L SIDE, CO-ALT, WITH ABOUT 150 FT HORIZ SEPARATION: AGAIN, TWR CTLR ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS TO FLY HDG OF 350 DEGS FOR FLT X. I DID NOT COMPLY WITH TWR'S INSTRUCTIONS AS THIS WOULD HAVE REDUCED SEPARATION WITH FLT Y ABOUT 1000-1200 FT AGL, FLT Y BEGAN A L BANK TURN AND BEGAN TO INCREASE HORIZ SEPARATION. ANALYSIS: FLT Y WAS EXECUTING A GAR FROM RWY 36L AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT BECAUSE OF AN ACFT ON THE RWY. TWR CTLR, (IN MY VIEW) CAUSED THE SIT TO OCCUR FOR FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) TOO LITTLE SEPARATION BTWN ACFT LNDG ON RWY 36L LED TO A NEED FOR FLT Y TO GAR. 2) ONCE FLT Y INITIATED GAR, TWR DID NOT ISSUE INSTRUCTIONS TO INSURE SEPARATION BTWN FLT Y ON THE GO AND FLT X ON TKOF. 3) TWR COMPOUNDED THE PROB BY ISSUING INSTRUCTIONS (L HDG 350 DEG) TO FLT X WHICH WOULD HAVE INCREASED THE CONFLICT. HAD I COMPLIED WITH THOSE INSTRUCTIONS, IT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A MID-AIR COLLISION.

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.