Air carrier complains about proximity of reporter.

Attributes
ACN	300179
Time
Date	199503
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : isp
State Reference	NY
Altitude	msl bound lower : 12700 msl bound upper : 12700
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zbw
Operator	other
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	VFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 60 flight time total : 10000
ASRS Report	300179
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 6000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

After landing the pilot of a air carrier B-747 filed a formal complaint that I flew too close to his aircraft. I was at 12700 ft doing air survey work, in contact with ZBW. Center pointed the aircraft out to me. I saw it, maintained visual contact with it from a point about 9 mi away until it passed 1 or more mi in front of me. From ATC information and from my own judgement there was no collision hazard. The B-747 pilots complaint stems from a TCASII alert. I do not think he ever had a visual sighting of my aircraft. I can sympathize with the pilot of the B-747. If a passenger saw my aircraft and felt I was too close it would be wise for the 747 pilot to have a complaint on record. The problem I have is, if I would have elected not to maintain radio contact with a facility as a courtesy, none of this would have happened because the controller would probably have vectored the 747 off course. Does this mean that by not maintaining radio and radar contact I can enhance safety. I think not.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR COMPLAINS ABOUT PROX OF RPTR.

Narrative: AFTER LNDG THE PLT OF A ACR B-747 FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT THAT I FLEW TOO CLOSE TO HIS ACFT. I WAS AT 12700 FT DOING AIR SURVEY WORK, IN CONTACT WITH ZBW. CTR POINTED THE ACFT OUT TO ME. I SAW IT, MAINTAINED VISUAL CONTACT WITH IT FROM A POINT ABOUT 9 MI AWAY UNTIL IT PASSED 1 OR MORE MI IN FRONT OF ME. FROM ATC INFO AND FROM MY OWN JUDGEMENT THERE WAS NO COLLISION HAZARD. THE B-747 PLTS COMPLAINT STEMS FROM A TCASII ALERT. I DO NOT THINK HE EVER HAD A VISUAL SIGHTING OF MY ACFT. I CAN SYMPATHIZE WITH THE PLT OF THE B-747. IF A PAX SAW MY ACFT AND FELT I WAS TOO CLOSE IT WOULD BE WISE FOR THE 747 PLT TO HAVE A COMPLAINT ON RECORD. THE PROB I HAVE IS, IF I WOULD HAVE ELECTED NOT TO MAINTAIN RADIO CONTACT WITH A FACILITY AS A COURTESY, NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED BECAUSE THE CTLR WOULD PROBABLY HAVE VECTORED THE 747 OFF COURSE. DOES THIS MEAN THAT BY NOT MAINTAINING RADIO AND RADAR CONTACT I CAN ENHANCE SAFETY. I THINK NOT.

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.