Narrative:

Challenger jet was on departure, just airborne, and the twin cessna, not complying entirely with instructions, passed to the right and maybe above the departure. The CL65 descended approximately 150 ft and the twin cessna was continuing a shallow left turn sbound. Supplemental information from acn 352532: air carrier X was cleared for takeoff runway 34L at slc -- at 400 ft AGL we received a TA (TCASII alert). The act was sighted at 2:30 O'clock position and at that moment we aggressively pitched aircraft nose down to avoid collision -- estimated within 100-200 ft and at 1 second to point of impact! Upon asking ATC (tower) what was that all about, their response was that he was VFR and supposed to be between the runways. I said 'he's not and we almost hit him.' we had ATC mark the tape and I filed reports to my company. Later I had heard that the aircraft either heard his clearance wrong, or ATC issued it wrong. We were northbound, other aircraft was sbound, ATC never told us about our traffic! GA traffic departing on the east runway 17/35 at slc should be given the right or left turn so as to execute a 270 degree turn to the east side for altitude gain, then come back perpendicular to the runways over the top of the airport at 6500-8500 ft MSL. That would have solved our problem -- at this altitude. They would not conflict with downwind traffic at 12000 ft MSL or departing traffic climbing to 11000 ft MSL. Smaller, less complex GA aircraft and pilots operating under VFR at a class B TCA controled airport, must be watched more closely as to altitude and flight path assignments. Most of these pilots are inexperienced and possibly somewhat overwhelmed operating out of a TCA. Had ATC monitored his flight path and issued instructions to correct, our situation would have been avoided! It is my understanding that there are in excess of 25 new ATC trainees training at the slc ATC facility. In my opinion that's too many considering the type airspace, size of airport and daily operations at slc. Supplemental information from acn 352534: I cleared a twin cessna to depart runway 35. I issued a turn direct to the approach end of runway 34L. He did not comply. I issued traffic to the C310 about the CL65 departing runway 34L. He reported traffic insight. The air carrier CL65 leveled off his climb on departure.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C310 WAS CLRED OFF RWY 35 WITH A L TURN DIRECT TO THE APCH END OF RWY 34L AT SLC. AN ACR CL65 WAS CLRED FOR TKOF RWY 34L AND AT 400 FT AGL RECEIVED A TCASII ALERT ON THE C310 WHO WAS AT THE CL65'S 2:30 O'CLOCK POS AND APPROX THE SAME ALT. THE CL65 PUSHED THEIR NOSE DOWN AND SAW THE C310 PASS APPROX 100-200 FT ABOVE AND TO THEIR R. THE E LCL CTLR HAD ISSUED THE CL65 AS TFC AND THE C310 SAID HE SAW HIM. THE CL65 FILED AN NMAC RPT ON THIS INCIDENT.

Narrative: CHALLENGER JET WAS ON DEP, JUST AIRBORNE, AND THE TWIN CESSNA, NOT COMPLYING ENTIRELY WITH INSTRUCTIONS, PASSED TO THE R AND MAYBE ABOVE THE DEP. THE CL65 DSNDED APPROX 150 FT AND THE TWIN CESSNA WAS CONTINUING A SHALLOW L TURN SBOUND. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 352532: ACR X WAS CLRED FOR TKOF RWY 34L AT SLC -- AT 400 FT AGL WE RECEIVED A TA (TCASII ALERT). THE ACT WAS SIGHTED AT 2:30 O'CLOCK POS AND AT THAT MOMENT WE AGGRESSIVELY PITCHED ACFT NOSE DOWN TO AVOID COLLISION -- ESTIMATED WITHIN 100-200 FT AND AT 1 SECOND TO POINT OF IMPACT! UPON ASKING ATC (TWR) WHAT WAS THAT ALL ABOUT, THEIR RESPONSE WAS THAT HE WAS VFR AND SUPPOSED TO BE BTWN THE RWYS. I SAID 'HE'S NOT AND WE ALMOST HIT HIM.' WE HAD ATC MARK THE TAPE AND I FILED RPTS TO MY COMPANY. LATER I HAD HEARD THAT THE ACFT EITHER HEARD HIS CLRNC WRONG, OR ATC ISSUED IT WRONG. WE WERE NBOUND, OTHER ACFT WAS SBOUND, ATC NEVER TOLD US ABOUT OUR TFC! GA TFC DEPARTING ON THE E RWY 17/35 AT SLC SHOULD BE GIVEN THE R OR L TURN SO AS TO EXECUTE A 270 DEG TURN TO THE E SIDE FOR ALT GAIN, THEN COME BACK PERPENDICULAR TO THE RWYS OVER THE TOP OF THE ARPT AT 6500-8500 FT MSL. THAT WOULD HAVE SOLVED OUR PROB -- AT THIS ALT. THEY WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH DOWNWIND TFC AT 12000 FT MSL OR DEPARTING TFC CLBING TO 11000 FT MSL. SMALLER, LESS COMPLEX GA ACFT AND PLTS OPERATING UNDER VFR AT A CLASS B TCA CTLED ARPT, MUST BE WATCHED MORE CLOSELY AS TO ALT AND FLT PATH ASSIGNMENTS. MOST OF THESE PLTS ARE INEXPERIENCED AND POSSIBLY SOMEWHAT OVERWHELMED OPERATING OUT OF A TCA. HAD ATC MONITORED HIS FLT PATH AND ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS TO CORRECT, OUR SIT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED! IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE IN EXCESS OF 25 NEW ATC TRAINEES TRAINING AT THE SLC ATC FACILITY. IN MY OPINION THAT'S TOO MANY CONSIDERING THE TYPE AIRSPACE, SIZE OF ARPT AND DAILY OPS AT SLC. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 352534: I CLRED A TWIN CESSNA TO DEPART RWY 35. I ISSUED A TURN DIRECT TO THE APCH END OF RWY 34L. HE DID NOT COMPLY. I ISSUED TFC TO THE C310 ABOUT THE CL65 DEPARTING RWY 34L. HE RPTED TFC INSIGHT. THE ACR CL65 LEVELED OFF HIS CLB ON DEP.

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.