 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Pilot of VFR AA5B feels ATC failed to provide adequate vertical separation with IFR air carrier aircraft.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 789162 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200806 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : n90.tracon |
| State Reference | NY |
| Altitude | msl single value : 9500 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : n90.tracon tower : tjsj.tower |
| Operator | general aviation : personal |
| Make Model Name | Cheetah Tiger Traveler |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | cruise : level |
| Flight Plan | VFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : n90.tracon |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
| Route In Use | departure : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | flight crew : single pilot |
| Qualification | pilot : private pilot : instrument |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 25 flight time total : 1250 flight time type : 750 |
| ASRS Report | 789162 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne critical |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | flight crew : took precautionary avoidance action |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 0 vertical : 500 |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Airspace Structure ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
Narrative:
Our aircraft was in cruise VFR under radar advisories at 9500 ft with a scattered cloud layer below us with tops of 7000 ft. ATC issued a heading and climb instruction to the airbus and instructed the airbus to stop their climb at 9000 ft due to 'grumman traffic VFR at 9500 ft.' the airbus had just departed one of the nyc area airports. The airbus did not report us in sight. ATC did not call the airbus as traffic to us. We scanned looking for the airbus but were unsuccessful due to 1) a scattered cloud layer below us; and 2) being unsure of the relative location of the airbus. The airbus came into our sight and we immediately climbed as a precaution. The airbus was approximately 500 ft below us and passed directly under us. The controller instructed the airbus to then climb to 15000 ft as the 'traffic was no longer a factor.' we did not recall the airbus reporting us in sight; and we queried the controller and she and her supervisor did not recall if the airbus reported us in sight. I believe that the airbus should have been instructed to stop their climb at 8500 ft or us instructed to climb to 10000 ft to ensure 1000 ft of vertical separation between the 2 aircraft under radar identify by ATC where at least one of the aircraft did not report the other in sight. In this case neither aircraft had reported the other in sight. Contributing factors were likely: 1) the scattered cloud layer below us; 2) the controller's failure to call the airbus to us as traffic; and 3) a busy frequency.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: PLT OF VFR AA5B FEELS ATC FAILED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE VERTICAL SEPARATION WITH IFR ACR ACFT.
Narrative: OUR ACFT WAS IN CRUISE VFR UNDER RADAR ADVISORIES AT 9500 FT WITH A SCATTERED CLOUD LAYER BELOW US WITH TOPS OF 7000 FT. ATC ISSUED A HDG AND CLB INSTRUCTION TO THE AIRBUS AND INSTRUCTED THE AIRBUS TO STOP THEIR CLB AT 9000 FT DUE TO 'GRUMMAN TFC VFR AT 9500 FT.' THE AIRBUS HAD JUST DEPARTED ONE OF THE NYC AREA ARPTS. THE AIRBUS DID NOT RPT US IN SIGHT. ATC DID NOT CALL THE AIRBUS AS TFC TO US. WE SCANNED LOOKING FOR THE AIRBUS BUT WERE UNSUCCESSFUL DUE TO 1) A SCATTERED CLOUD LAYER BELOW US; AND 2) BEING UNSURE OF THE RELATIVE LOCATION OF THE AIRBUS. THE AIRBUS CAME INTO OUR SIGHT AND WE IMMEDIATELY CLBED AS A PRECAUTION. THE AIRBUS WAS APPROX 500 FT BELOW US AND PASSED DIRECTLY UNDER US. THE CTLR INSTRUCTED THE AIRBUS TO THEN CLB TO 15000 FT AS THE 'TFC WAS NO LONGER A FACTOR.' WE DID NOT RECALL THE AIRBUS RPTING US IN SIGHT; AND WE QUERIED THE CTLR AND SHE AND HER SUPVR DID NOT RECALL IF THE AIRBUS RPTED US IN SIGHT. I BELIEVE THAT THE AIRBUS SHOULD HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO STOP THEIR CLB AT 8500 FT OR US INSTRUCTED TO CLB TO 10000 FT TO ENSURE 1000 FT OF VERT SEPARATION BTWN THE 2 ACFT UNDER RADAR IDENT BY ATC WHERE AT LEAST ONE OF THE ACFT DID NOT RPT THE OTHER IN SIGHT. IN THIS CASE NEITHER ACFT HAD RPTED THE OTHER IN SIGHT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE LIKELY: 1) THE SCATTERED CLOUD LAYER BELOW US; 2) THE CTLR'S FAILURE TO CALL THE AIRBUS TO US AS TFC; AND 3) A BUSY FREQ.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.