Narrative:

Clt approach vectored us in to a 'close in' right base for runway 20. Approximately 3 mi out, they turned us over to the concord tower. Tower asked us to call a 3 mi final for runway 20. We were monitoring TCASII and completing the before landing checklist. As we turned final, the TCASII began to give us a TA for one target below and right. Within seconds, the TA became an RA. I immediately initiated a go around. The last time I looked at the TCASII, the target was indicating 200 ft below us and climbing. Tower then called the go around as well. They climbed us to 3000 ft MSL and turned us over to clt approach. We were then vectored around for left traffic and over to the tower where we landed without incident. After shutdown, I called the concord tower to discuss the incident. It was brought to my attention that the tower was told that we were on a 5 mi final. When in fact, clt approach specifically told us to make a close right base. So when we were switched over to the tower, they were looking for us on a 5 mi final -- when in fact we were 3 mi out on a right base. 2 other aircraft were close in with us at this time -- the one we had incident with, and one other. In my opinion, the prevention of this occurrence in the future is the responsibility of clt approach. Better communication between clt and concord will prevent this from happening again.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HS25 FLC INITIATE EVASIVE TCASII MANEUVER DUE TO OVERTAKEN AND CLBING TFC AT JQF ARPT. IN A LATER COM WITH JQF, SUPVR ADVISED CLT COORD DIFFERED FROM HS25'S ACTUAL POS.

Narrative: CLT APCH VECTORED US IN TO A 'CLOSE IN' R BASE FOR RWY 20. APPROX 3 MI OUT, THEY TURNED US OVER TO THE CONCORD TWR. TWR ASKED US TO CALL A 3 MI FINAL FOR RWY 20. WE WERE MONITORING TCASII AND COMPLETING THE BEFORE LNDG CHKLIST. AS WE TURNED FINAL, THE TCASII BEGAN TO GIVE US A TA FOR ONE TARGET BELOW AND R. WITHIN SECONDS, THE TA BECAME AN RA. I IMMEDIATELY INITIATED A GAR. THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT THE TCASII, THE TARGET WAS INDICATING 200 FT BELOW US AND CLBING. TWR THEN CALLED THE GAR AS WELL. THEY CLBED US TO 3000 FT MSL AND TURNED US OVER TO CLT APCH. WE WERE THEN VECTORED AROUND FOR L TFC AND OVER TO THE TWR WHERE WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. AFTER SHUTDOWN, I CALLED THE CONCORD TWR TO DISCUSS THE INCIDENT. IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTN THAT THE TWR WAS TOLD THAT WE WERE ON A 5 MI FINAL. WHEN IN FACT, CLT APCH SPECIFICALLY TOLD US TO MAKE A CLOSE R BASE. SO WHEN WE WERE SWITCHED OVER TO THE TWR, THEY WERE LOOKING FOR US ON A 5 MI FINAL -- WHEN IN FACT WE WERE 3 MI OUT ON A R BASE. 2 OTHER ACFT WERE CLOSE IN WITH US AT THIS TIME -- THE ONE WE HAD INCIDENT WITH, AND ONE OTHER. IN MY OPINION, THE PREVENTION OF THIS OCCURRENCE IN THE FUTURE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CLT APCH. BETTER COM BTWN CLT AND CONCORD WILL PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.

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.