37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 280123 |
Time | |
Date | 199408 |
Day | Mon |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : rbv |
State Reference | NJ |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 15000 msl bound upper : 15000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : n90 tracon : gsp |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B727-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : second officer |
Qualification | pilot : flight engineer pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 4300 flight time type : 1100 |
ASRS Report | 280123 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course flight crew : took evasive action |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Miss Distance | horizontal : 1000 vertical : 700 |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Approaching rbv on climb out of jfk, passing approximately 14000 ft, cleared to 17000 ft. Received TCASII TA for traffic at 12 O'clock, plus 1500 ft, converging with us. We made a right turn and leveled at approximately 15000 ft, and asked ATC about traffic. He said something about 'that's why I leveled (somebody) at (some altitude).' he was garbled and what he said did not make sense to us. We had not heard anybody call any traffic or tell anyone to level off. We were still leveled at approximately 15000 ft and traffic passed off to our left at about plus 600 ft and 1000 ft away. We could clearly see it was a twin turboprop commuter. The controller then handed us off to new controller. We checked in and she immediately queried us as to our assigned altitude. None of us had heard anything different than 17000 ft so that's what we said. She said, 'roger, higher in 5 mi.' this appeared to confirm that we had not been assigned a lower altitude, which the previous controller had implied. We believe the first controller erred. There was a definite conflict which was resolved (thankfully) by TCASII. None of us heard a traffic callout or an assignment to level off to avoid the conflict. And if the controller did issue it, we did not read it back, and with such a serious conflict, you would think the controller would definitely be requiring a readback or some other confirmation from us to acknowledge the conflict.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLC OF AN LGT TURNED AND LEVELED OFF IN RESPONSE TO A TCASII RA.
Narrative: APCHING RBV ON CLBOUT OF JFK, PASSING APPROX 14000 FT, CLRED TO 17000 FT. RECEIVED TCASII TA FOR TFC AT 12 O'CLOCK, PLUS 1500 FT, CONVERGING WITH US. WE MADE A R TURN AND LEVELED AT APPROX 15000 FT, AND ASKED ATC ABOUT TFC. HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT 'THAT'S WHY I LEVELED (SOMEBODY) AT (SOME ALT).' HE WAS GARBLED AND WHAT HE SAID DID NOT MAKE SENSE TO US. WE HAD NOT HEARD ANYBODY CALL ANY TFC OR TELL ANYONE TO LEVEL OFF. WE WERE STILL LEVELED AT APPROX 15000 FT AND TFC PASSED OFF TO OUR L AT ABOUT PLUS 600 FT AND 1000 FT AWAY. WE COULD CLRLY SEE IT WAS A TWIN TURBOPROP COMMUTER. THE CTLR THEN HANDED US OFF TO NEW CTLR. WE CHKED IN AND SHE IMMEDIATELY QUERIED US AS TO OUR ASSIGNED ALT. NONE OF US HAD HEARD ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN 17000 FT SO THAT'S WHAT WE SAID. SHE SAID, 'ROGER, HIGHER IN 5 MI.' THIS APPEARED TO CONFIRM THAT WE HAD NOT BEEN ASSIGNED A LOWER ALT, WHICH THE PREVIOUS CTLR HAD IMPLIED. WE BELIEVE THE FIRST CTLR ERRED. THERE WAS A DEFINITE CONFLICT WHICH WAS RESOLVED (THANKFULLY) BY TCASII. NONE OF US HEARD A TFC CALLOUT OR AN ASSIGNMENT TO LEVEL OFF TO AVOID THE CONFLICT. AND IF THE CTLR DID ISSUE IT, WE DID NOT READ IT BACK, AND WITH SUCH A SERIOUS CONFLICT, YOU WOULD THINK THE CTLR WOULD DEFINITELY BE REQUIRING A READBACK OR SOME OTHER CONFIRMATION FROM US TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CONFLICT.
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.