Narrative:

I feel that no conflict or error in operation occurred. I wish to make this report, however, both to document TCASII effectiveness and on the chance others may have viewed it differently. We were on a high left downwind for runway 16R. We were cleared for a visual approach. Shortly afterward we were advised of VFR traffic and told not to turn base until we had that traffic in sight. That traffic was already north of the airport and flying northwest -- away from the field. We sighted the aircraft. I saw the aircraft which was below us and heading the opposite direction of what my heading on final would be. He was also west of the final. I began a constant 30 degree left turn in a descent that I felt would keep me above and behind the aircraft. At the point where my turning came closest to the other aircraft, I received a very brief TCASII RA to 'climb,' followed immediately by a 'clear of conflict.' I feel the TCASII gave this warning since, had I remained on the heading that would have caused a conflict rather than turning through it as I did, there would have been a conflict. Nonetheless, I was somewhat concerned to get the RA even though I, my first officer, and the other aircraft all saw each other. My first officer and I agreed the turn would produce diverging courses -- us turning on final for runway 16, and the other aircraft continuing northwest. Again, I felt comfortable and safe with this turn to final due to our visual on the aircraft. The TCASII worked as advertised even though at no time was there any threat of conflict or need to take evasive action. Enclosed is a sketch of flight.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF AN MLG EXPERIENCED A BRIEF TCASII RA INDICATING TFC CLBING OUT TOWARD WHICH THE RPTR WAS DSNDING AND TURNING ONTO FINAL. THE TFC HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THEM AS AN ADVISORY FROM ATC WHO ADVISED NOT TO TURN BASE LEG UNTIL THE TFC WAS IN SIGHT. IT WAS AND THEY GOT THE TCASII RA.

Narrative: I FEEL THAT NO CONFLICT OR ERROR IN OP OCCURRED. I WISH TO MAKE THIS RPT, HOWEVER, BOTH TO DOCUMENT TCASII EFFECTIVENESS AND ON THE CHANCE OTHERS MAY HAVE VIEWED IT DIFFERENTLY. WE WERE ON A HIGH L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 16R. WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH. SHORTLY AFTERWARD WE WERE ADVISED OF VFR TFC AND TOLD NOT TO TURN BASE UNTIL WE HAD THAT TFC IN SIGHT. THAT TFC WAS ALREADY N OF THE ARPT AND FLYING NW -- AWAY FROM THE FIELD. WE SIGHTED THE ACFT. I SAW THE ACFT WHICH WAS BELOW US AND HDG THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF WHAT MY HDG ON FINAL WOULD BE. HE WAS ALSO W OF THE FINAL. I BEGAN A CONSTANT 30 DEG L TURN IN A DSCNT THAT I FELT WOULD KEEP ME ABOVE AND BEHIND THE ACFT. AT THE POINT WHERE MY TURNING CAME CLOSEST TO THE OTHER ACFT, I RECEIVED A VERY BRIEF TCASII RA TO 'CLB,' FOLLOWED IMMEDIATELY BY A 'CLR OF CONFLICT.' I FEEL THE TCASII GAVE THIS WARNING SINCE, HAD I REMAINED ON THE HDG THAT WOULD HAVE CAUSED A CONFLICT RATHER THAN TURNING THROUGH IT AS I DID, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A CONFLICT. NONETHELESS, I WAS SOMEWHAT CONCERNED TO GET THE RA EVEN THOUGH I, MY FO, AND THE OTHER ACFT ALL SAW EACH OTHER. MY FO AND I AGREED THE TURN WOULD PRODUCE DIVERGING COURSES -- US TURNING ON FINAL FOR RWY 16, AND THE OTHER ACFT CONTINUING NW. AGAIN, I FELT COMFORTABLE AND SAFE WITH THIS TURN TO FINAL DUE TO OUR VISUAL ON THE ACFT. THE TCASII WORKED AS ADVERTISED EVEN THOUGH AT NO TIME WAS THERE ANY THREAT OF CONFLICT OR NEED TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION. ENCLOSED IS A SKETCH OF FLT.

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.