Mdt crew had less than legal separation in C90 class B airspace.

Attributes
ACN	502310
Time
Date	200102
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : lga.airport
State Reference	NY
Altitude	msl single value : 2000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Weather Elements	other
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : n90.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 31 other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tracon : n90.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 31
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 7000 flight time type : 2000
ASRS Report	502310
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe inflight encounter : weather inflight encounter other non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	controller : separated traffic controller : issued new clearance flight crew : took precautionary avoidance action flight crew : executed go around none taken : insufficient time
Miss Distance	horizontal : 9000 vertical : 600
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Weather
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

Being vectored by lga approach, on right downwind to intercept localizer runway 31 approach. Winds 340 degrees at 20 KTS gusting to 30 KTS. Controller gave us a right turn to 220 degree heading. On TCASII it looked like he was trying to get us between 2 aircraft on final 5 mi apart. We made turn, but by the time the autoplt swung the aircraft around and the wind pushed us (winds at 2000-3000 ft were 40-50 KTS) we were headed directly for the second aircraft, same altitude as us, 2000 ft MSL. We got a TA on TCASII. Controller gave us an immediate climb to 2600 ft. We climbed, then vectored across localizer, another vector to right, to intercept again. The controller asked us if we had aircraft in sight. I said we did. We had 1.5 mi separation, then he cleared us for the visual and dumped us on tower. We contacted tower. Tower asked 'do you have the aircraft ahead in sight?' I said 'yes, but I do not know what we are doing here.' the tower told us to go around and climbed us to 3000 ft. Back with approach, they gave us the same 220 degree heading as they swung us back to intercept again. We landed with no further conflict. I'm pretty sure that first officer and I were correct with the headings flown. We queried each other and agreed 220 degrees was the original assigned heading. Things we could have done: query a controller, even the new york guys make mistakes although I do think they are some of the best in the business.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MDT CREW HAD LESS THAN LEGAL SEPARATION IN C90 CLASS B AIRSPACE.

Narrative: BEING VECTORED BY LGA APCH, ON R DOWNWIND TO INTERCEPT LOC RWY 31 APCH. WINDS 340 DEGS AT 20 KTS GUSTING TO 30 KTS. CTLR GAVE US A R TURN TO 220 DEG HDG. ON TCASII IT LOOKED LIKE HE WAS TRYING TO GET US BTWN 2 ACFT ON FINAL 5 MI APART. WE MADE TURN, BUT BY THE TIME THE AUTOPLT SWUNG THE ACFT AROUND AND THE WIND PUSHED US (WINDS AT 2000-3000 FT WERE 40-50 KTS) WE WERE HEADED DIRECTLY FOR THE SECOND ACFT, SAME ALT AS US, 2000 FT MSL. WE GOT A TA ON TCASII. CTLR GAVE US AN IMMEDIATE CLB TO 2600 FT. WE CLBED, THEN VECTORED ACROSS LOC, ANOTHER VECTOR TO R, TO INTERCEPT AGAIN. THE CTLR ASKED US IF WE HAD ACFT IN SIGHT. I SAID WE DID. WE HAD 1.5 MI SEPARATION, THEN HE CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL AND DUMPED US ON TWR. WE CONTACTED TWR. TWR ASKED 'DO YOU HAVE THE ACFT AHEAD IN SIGHT?' I SAID 'YES, BUT I DO NOT KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE.' THE TWR TOLD US TO GO AROUND AND CLBED US TO 3000 FT. BACK WITH APCH, THEY GAVE US THE SAME 220 DEG HDG AS THEY SWUNG US BACK TO INTERCEPT AGAIN. WE LANDED WITH NO FURTHER CONFLICT. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT FO AND I WERE CORRECT WITH THE HDGS FLOWN. WE QUERIED EACH OTHER AND AGREED 220 DEGS WAS THE ORIGINAL ASSIGNED HDG. THINGS WE COULD HAVE DONE: QUERY A CTLR, EVEN THE NEW YORK GUYS MAKE MISTAKES ALTHOUGH I DO THINK THEY ARE SOME OF THE BEST IN THE BUSINESS.

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.