Narrative:

While established on sna's eastside 1 arrival and just north of archi, our flight was allowed to be flown into an unsafe situation relating to a traffic conflict with another IFR aircraft by the socal approach controller working 119.65. This other aircraft was coming towards us at our 1 - 2 O'clock position and 500 ft below and climbing. Our TCASII displayed it as a TA. This is when the socal approach controller gave us an advisory that this aircraft was climbing to 12000 ft MSL, our assigned altitude. We did sight this aircraft coming towards us, a light twin, and our TCASII started to command a descent with its RA. We had the aircraft in sight and started our descent while talking to socal approach. The controller finally came alive and excitedly stated that our aircraft's equipment was not operating properly and that we should be climbing. As the controller was talking and the first officer still sighting the traffic, I climbed to 12600 ft MSL at which time we could see the traffic pass behind our aircraft within 1/2 mi. This socal controller's lack of input, besides that of his initial TA, was totally unsafe and uncalled for given our controled environment of altitude, airspeed and course with that of another IFR aircraft's. This frequency that we were assigned was not very congested at all and all that we received from this socal clear was his blame of our TCASII equipment which, in fact, was operating properly, and a quick frequency change shortly thereafter. In noting my previous flts into this area, there are an inordinate amount of 'accepted' close flight segments. Most likely, our socal controller was being forced to accept this as a 'norm' and, somehow, let our situation develop because it slipped past him. This area that socal works does need to have their accepted practices reviewed and altered for greater flight separation and clrer TA's.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: OPERROR BTWN ACR MLG AND A LIGHT UGA TWIN ENG ACFT. TWIN WAS CLBING TO 12000 FT THE SAME ALT OF THE ACR. TFC HAD BEEN ISSUED TO THE ACR BY THE CTLR AND WAS SIGHTED VISUALLY AND ON TCASII. FLC TOOK EVASIVE ACTION WHEN RA COMMANDED A DSCNT. THE CTLR SAID THEY SHOULD BE CLBING WHICH THEY DID. LTSS.

Narrative: WHILE ESTABLISHED ON SNA'S EASTSIDE 1 ARR AND JUST N OF ARCHI, OUR FLT WAS ALLOWED TO BE FLOWN INTO AN UNSAFE SIT RELATING TO A TFC CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER IFR ACFT BY THE SOCAL APCH CTLR WORKING 119.65. THIS OTHER ACFT WAS COMING TOWARDS US AT OUR 1 - 2 O'CLOCK POS AND 500 FT BELOW AND CLBING. OUR TCASII DISPLAYED IT AS A TA. THIS IS WHEN THE SOCAL APCH CTLR GAVE US AN ADVISORY THAT THIS ACFT WAS CLBING TO 12000 FT MSL, OUR ASSIGNED ALT. WE DID SIGHT THIS ACFT COMING TOWARDS US, A LIGHT TWIN, AND OUR TCASII STARTED TO COMMAND A DSCNT WITH ITS RA. WE HAD THE ACFT IN SIGHT AND STARTED OUR DSCNT WHILE TALKING TO SOCAL APCH. THE CTLR FINALLY CAME ALIVE AND EXCITEDLY STATED THAT OUR ACFT'S EQUIP WAS NOT OPERATING PROPERLY AND THAT WE SHOULD BE CLBING. AS THE CTLR WAS TALKING AND THE FO STILL SIGHTING THE TFC, I CLBED TO 12600 FT MSL AT WHICH TIME WE COULD SEE THE TFC PASS BEHIND OUR ACFT WITHIN 1/2 MI. THIS SOCAL CTLR'S LACK OF INPUT, BESIDES THAT OF HIS INITIAL TA, WAS TOTALLY UNSAFE AND UNCALLED FOR GIVEN OUR CTLED ENVIRONMENT OF ALT, AIRSPD AND COURSE WITH THAT OF ANOTHER IFR ACFT'S. THIS FREQ THAT WE WERE ASSIGNED WAS NOT VERY CONGESTED AT ALL AND ALL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THIS SOCAL CLR WAS HIS BLAME OF OUR TCASII EQUIP WHICH, IN FACT, WAS OPERATING PROPERLY, AND A QUICK FREQ CHANGE SHORTLY THEREAFTER. IN NOTING MY PREVIOUS FLTS INTO THIS AREA, THERE ARE AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF 'ACCEPTED' CLOSE FLT SEGMENTS. MOST LIKELY, OUR SOCAL CTLR WAS BEING FORCED TO ACCEPT THIS AS A 'NORM' AND, SOMEHOW, LET OUR SIT DEVELOP BECAUSE IT SLIPPED PAST HIM. THIS AREA THAT SOCAL WORKS DOES NEED TO HAVE THEIR ACCEPTED PRACTICES REVIEWED AND ALTERED FOR GREATER FLT SEPARATION AND CLRER TA'S.

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.