Narrative:

On the pusch departure from phx, we just started the turn from a 240 degree heading to the 140 degree heading at 9 DME to intercept the 320 degree radial inbound to tfd on the departure, when departure control informed us we had traffic at 9 O'clock position 5-7 mi. Well we were in the turn with our nose almost on a 180 degree heading. As I looked to our left to find the issued traffic, I in fact did see an airplane approximately 5-7 mi on a left downwind for runway 26. The traffic the controller wanted us to reference was in fact at our 3 O'clock position with reference to our turn. When we called the traffic in sight, we were instructed to continue the climb and pass behind the traffic. No problem, however, the traffic the controller wanted us to pass behind was not the same traffic. Needless to say, we passed in front of the traffic. We passed approximately 5 mi in front of the traffic. I believe this misunderstanding could have been avoided if we could have been given a vector, departure controller would have waited until his radar gave an accurate indication of our heading with regard to our turn, and we, as a crew should have never called traffic in sight.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MLG FLC HAS TFC POINTED OUT TO THEM WHILE THEY ARE IN A TURN. THE DEP CTLR REFED THE TFC AS BEING AT 9 O'CLOCK POS WHEN IT WAS CLOSER TO 3 O'CLOCK POS AFTER THE TURN. THE FLC MISIDENTED THE TFC AND, APPARENTLY, NEVER SAW THE TFC OF INTEREST TO THE CTLR AND THEY PASSED IN FRONT OF IT INSTEAD OF BEHIND.

Narrative: ON THE PUSCH DEP FROM PHX, WE JUST STARTED THE TURN FROM A 240 DEG HDG TO THE 140 DEG HDG AT 9 DME TO INTERCEPT THE 320 DEG RADIAL INBOUND TO TFD ON THE DEP, WHEN DEP CTL INFORMED US WE HAD TFC AT 9 O'CLOCK POS 5-7 MI. WELL WE WERE IN THE TURN WITH OUR NOSE ALMOST ON A 180 DEG HDG. AS I LOOKED TO OUR L TO FIND THE ISSUED TFC, I IN FACT DID SEE AN AIRPLANE APPROX 5-7 MI ON A L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 26. THE TFC THE CTLR WANTED US TO REF WAS IN FACT AT OUR 3 O'CLOCK POS WITH REF TO OUR TURN. WHEN WE CALLED THE TFC IN SIGHT, WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO CONTINUE THE CLB AND PASS BEHIND THE TFC. NO PROB, HOWEVER, THE TFC THE CTLR WANTED US TO PASS BEHIND WAS NOT THE SAME TFC. NEEDLESS TO SAY, WE PASSED IN FRONT OF THE TFC. WE PASSED APPROX 5 MI IN FRONT OF THE TFC. I BELIEVE THIS MISUNDERSTANDING COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF WE COULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN A VECTOR, DEP CTLR WOULD HAVE WAITED UNTIL HIS RADAR GAVE AN ACCURATE INDICATION OF OUR HEADING WITH REGARD TO OUR TURN, AND WE, AS A CREW SHOULD HAVE NEVER CALLED TFC IN SIGHT.

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.