Narrative:

I was captain and PF on a scheduled flight from jfk to phl. Shortly after leaving jfk at 6000 ft, still with departure and about 5 mi from cyn VOR on victor 1, I saw a cessna at our altitude and opposite direction. I looked at the TCASII but saw no target, so I decided to take evasive action. I banked left and turned 40 degrees off course turning on all my lights (conspicuity lights were already on). I could then see that he was not opposite direction but moving slightly right to left. I increased my bank to turn further away, unable to safely reverse the turn. I estimate horizontal distance to be 1/2 mi. The first officer had a visual on him. Finally, it showed up on the TCASII and was observed descending at a fast rate. I rejoined the airway and we asked ATC if he had any traffic for us. He replied casually, 'just a jumper plane passing off your right, no factor!' it turns out this guy was working that traffic the whole time! Had I not taken evasive action, it would have been a collision. I do not know why it did not show up on TCASII. I told the controller about our evasive action and added that maybe the jump plane should do his stuff off the airway. (Victor 1 is the busiest airway on the east coast). He said that it was not on the airway. I did not get into explaining to him that airways are 8 mi wide. Further down the road, with mcguire approach 15 mi from vcn VOR, ATC gave us a descent to 4000 ft. Soon after reaching 4000 ft, I saw a TCASII target opposite direction 500 ft above and 5 mi. I slowed from 210 KIAS to 190 KIAS and we looked. ATC frequency was congested and the first officer could not ask about the target. At about 1 mi, the TCASII showed it begin to descend and an RA commanded a 2500 FPM descent. I went to flight idle and pushed the nose over. At about 2700 ft MSL, the RA was resolved, and I recovered at 2500 ft MSL. Thank god the passenger and flight attendant were seated. The target passed overhead and slightly to the right, but was never in sight. We got in touch with ATC, told him of our RA and evasive action and he seemed puzzled as to why we were telling him about it. We told him it was mandatory for us to follow the RA and report any deviation from assigned course or altitude. He said fine and gave us a vector and had us maintain 2500 ft. We were still 35 mi out of phl, and I was not happy. He then asked us what an RA was! As the first officer was talking to him, we got another RA! The controller got an earful of 'climb, climb' and the RA commanded a 1500 FPM climb, which I did. At 3000 ft it was resolved and I recovered. ATC then said 'go ahead and maintain 3000 ft, turn right heading 360 degrees, #2 behind a DC9, cleared for the approach.' I saw the 9 and on TCASII he was about 3 mi! Talk about no breaks. Not once were any of these RA aircraft pointed out to us. I understand ATC only has an obligation to separate IFR from IFR, but good god, these guys are really getting lax. In each case, ATC knew of the traffic but did not tel us. Clearly the level of competence of the controllers is getting worse. I have been flying for 9 yrs, and the quality of service has really gone downhill. It's sad that a controller working in a class B terminal with heavy airline operations does not know what an RA is, or how it is caused. At any rate, ATC should have a legal obligation to separate IFR from all targets visible. 300 ft or less than 1/2 mi between an IFR transport and VFR traffic is an abomination. What kind of training are these guys getting anyway? This was a beautiful cavu VFR saturday, with private pilots everywhere. As an aircraft owner, I am a big supporter of GA, however the GA pilot population needs to be better educated on how to operate safely in the busy northeast corridor, and around terminal areas. I believe the FAA should take a leadership role in solving this. They already have a system in place with the wings program. As well as teaching flight instructors to emphasize this in their training to teach others. ZNY has gotten some new equipment, which is great, but they have us turboprops even lower than usual to accommodate increased separation until they learn the new system. Our normal altitude sebound is 12000 ft, but we are given 6000 ft instead, and dropped to 4000 ft within 50 mi of the airport. Very unsafe. Things are back to normal now, but we still are given very low altitudes far away from the terminal, outside of the class B. This practice must stop or a collision is inevitable. All it takes is a VFR guy navigating on an airway, changing altitude with his transponder in standby mode.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR COMPLAINS THAT HIS FLT ENCOUNTERED SEVERAL TCASII RA'S, AND NO TA'S WERE ISSUED, EVEN THOUGH ATC MAY HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE OTHER ACFT. RPTR ADVOCATES ALL IFR ACFT SHOULD BE PROVIDED SEPARATION FROM ALL TARGETS.

Narrative: I WAS CAPT AND PF ON A SCHEDULED FLT FROM JFK TO PHL. SHORTLY AFTER LEAVING JFK AT 6000 FT, STILL WITH DEP AND ABOUT 5 MI FROM CYN VOR ON VICTOR 1, I SAW A CESSNA AT OUR ALT AND OPPOSITE DIRECTION. I LOOKED AT THE TCASII BUT SAW NO TARGET, SO I DECIDED TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION. I BANKED L AND TURNED 40 DEGS OFF COURSE TURNING ON ALL MY LIGHTS (CONSPICUITY LIGHTS WERE ALREADY ON). I COULD THEN SEE THAT HE WAS NOT OPPOSITE DIRECTION BUT MOVING SLIGHTLY R TO L. I INCREASED MY BANK TO TURN FURTHER AWAY, UNABLE TO SAFELY REVERSE THE TURN. I ESTIMATE HORIZ DISTANCE TO BE 1/2 MI. THE FO HAD A VISUAL ON HIM. FINALLY, IT SHOWED UP ON THE TCASII AND WAS OBSERVED DSNDING AT A FAST RATE. I REJOINED THE AIRWAY AND WE ASKED ATC IF HE HAD ANY TFC FOR US. HE REPLIED CASUALLY, 'JUST A JUMPER PLANE PASSING OFF YOUR R, NO FACTOR!' IT TURNS OUT THIS GUY WAS WORKING THAT TFC THE WHOLE TIME! HAD I NOT TAKEN EVASIVE ACTION, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A COLLISION. I DO NOT KNOW WHY IT DID NOT SHOW UP ON TCASII. I TOLD THE CTLR ABOUT OUR EVASIVE ACTION AND ADDED THAT MAYBE THE JUMP PLANE SHOULD DO HIS STUFF OFF THE AIRWAY. (VICTOR 1 IS THE BUSIEST AIRWAY ON THE EAST COAST). HE SAID THAT IT WAS NOT ON THE AIRWAY. I DID NOT GET INTO EXPLAINING TO HIM THAT AIRWAYS ARE 8 MI WIDE. FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, WITH MCGUIRE APCH 15 MI FROM VCN VOR, ATC GAVE US A DSCNT TO 4000 FT. SOON AFTER REACHING 4000 FT, I SAW A TCASII TARGET OPPOSITE DIRECTION 500 FT ABOVE AND 5 MI. I SLOWED FROM 210 KIAS TO 190 KIAS AND WE LOOKED. ATC FREQ WAS CONGESTED AND THE FO COULD NOT ASK ABOUT THE TARGET. AT ABOUT 1 MI, THE TCASII SHOWED IT BEGIN TO DSND AND AN RA COMMANDED A 2500 FPM DSCNT. I WENT TO FLT IDLE AND PUSHED THE NOSE OVER. AT ABOUT 2700 FT MSL, THE RA WAS RESOLVED, AND I RECOVERED AT 2500 FT MSL. THANK GOD THE PAX AND FLT ATTENDANT WERE SEATED. THE TARGET PASSED OVERHEAD AND SLIGHTLY TO THE R, BUT WAS NEVER IN SIGHT. WE GOT IN TOUCH WITH ATC, TOLD HIM OF OUR RA AND EVASIVE ACTION AND HE SEEMED PUZZLED AS TO WHY WE WERE TELLING HIM ABOUT IT. WE TOLD HIM IT WAS MANDATORY FOR US TO FOLLOW THE RA AND RPT ANY DEV FROM ASSIGNED COURSE OR ALT. HE SAID FINE AND GAVE US A VECTOR AND HAD US MAINTAIN 2500 FT. WE WERE STILL 35 MI OUT OF PHL, AND I WAS NOT HAPPY. HE THEN ASKED US WHAT AN RA WAS! AS THE FO WAS TALKING TO HIM, WE GOT ANOTHER RA! THE CTLR GOT AN EARFUL OF 'CLB, CLB' AND THE RA COMMANDED A 1500 FPM CLB, WHICH I DID. AT 3000 FT IT WAS RESOLVED AND I RECOVERED. ATC THEN SAID 'GO AHEAD AND MAINTAIN 3000 FT, TURN R HDG 360 DEGS, #2 BEHIND A DC9, CLRED FOR THE APCH.' I SAW THE 9 AND ON TCASII HE WAS ABOUT 3 MI! TALK ABOUT NO BREAKS. NOT ONCE WERE ANY OF THESE RA ACFT POINTED OUT TO US. I UNDERSTAND ATC ONLY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO SEPARATE IFR FROM IFR, BUT GOOD GOD, THESE GUYS ARE REALLY GETTING LAX. IN EACH CASE, ATC KNEW OF THE TFC BUT DID NOT TEL US. CLRLY THE LEVEL OF COMPETENCE OF THE CTLRS IS GETTING WORSE. I HAVE BEEN FLYING FOR 9 YRS, AND THE QUALITY OF SVC HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL. IT'S SAD THAT A CTLR WORKING IN A CLASS B TERMINAL WITH HVY AIRLINE OPS DOES NOT KNOW WHAT AN RA IS, OR HOW IT IS CAUSED. AT ANY RATE, ATC SHOULD HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO SEPARATE IFR FROM ALL TARGETS VISIBLE. 300 FT OR LESS THAN 1/2 MI BTWN AN IFR TRANSPORT AND VFR TFC IS AN ABOMINATION. WHAT KIND OF TRAINING ARE THESE GUYS GETTING ANYWAY? THIS WAS A BEAUTIFUL CAVU VFR SATURDAY, WITH PVT PLTS EVERYWHERE. AS AN ACFT OWNER, I AM A BIG SUPPORTER OF GA, HOWEVER THE GA PLT POPULATION NEEDS TO BE BETTER EDUCATED ON HOW TO OPERATE SAFELY IN THE BUSY NE CORRIDOR, AND AROUND TERMINAL AREAS. I BELIEVE THE FAA SHOULD TAKE A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN SOLVING THIS. THEY ALREADY HAVE A SYS IN PLACE WITH THE WINGS PROGRAM. AS WELL AS TEACHING FLT INSTRUCTORS TO EMPHASIZE THIS IN THEIR TRAINING TO TEACH OTHERS. ZNY HAS GOTTEN SOME NEW EQUIP, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT THEY HAVE US TURBOPROPS EVEN LOWER THAN USUAL TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASED SEPARATION UNTIL THEY LEARN THE NEW SYS. OUR NORMAL ALT SEBOUND IS 12000 FT, BUT WE ARE GIVEN 6000 FT INSTEAD, AND DROPPED TO 4000 FT WITHIN 50 MI OF THE ARPT. VERY UNSAFE. THINGS ARE BACK TO NORMAL NOW, BUT WE STILL ARE GIVEN VERY LOW ALTS FAR AWAY FROM THE TERMINAL, OUTSIDE OF THE CLASS B. THIS PRACTICE MUST STOP OR A COLLISION IS INEVITABLE. ALL IT TAKES IS A VFR GUY NAVING ON AN AIRWAY, CHANGING ALT WITH HIS XPONDER IN STANDBY MODE.

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.