A ZAB supervisor; investigating a TCAS conflict event; discovered a misconception he and other contr...

Attributes
ACN	863459
Time
Date	200912
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	ZAB.ARTCC
State Reference	NM
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Climb
Route In Use	None
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Supervisor / CIC
Person 2
Function	Pilot Flying Captain
Qualification	Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor Flight Crew Instrument
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 165 Flight Crew Total 3200 Flight Crew Type 1340
Events
Anomaly	Conflict Airborne Conflict

Narrative:

I became aware aircraft X was flying in our airspace to siver city; new mexico. I was curious why this aircraft had not responded to a TCAS RA. I asked the pilot to contact me once he was on the ground. He called and I asked him about the event. He informed me his TCAS equipment only provided TA's. The equipment just advises him where the traffic and changes color as it becomes closer. I was not aware of any equipment in the system that did not provide an RA. I thought that's how the system works and why controllers are not to issue any clearances to aircraft responding to a RA. I have talked to numerous people; including people in aov; since this discussion and no one was aware of this type of TCAS in the system. Air carrier Y responded to a RA to descend due to the rate of climb of aircraft X. Aircraft X on another frequency responded to a control instruction to descend back down to FL400. One aircraft responding to a RA; one aircraft responding to a control instruction sounds very similar to a midair in europe. We are briefing our workforce on this information. If it is the case that TCAS equipment as described are in the system this information needs to be disseminated. There should be a way to recognize these types of equipped aircraft. If TCAS is the failsafe system for this type event then all aircraft should receive RA's to prevent a midair.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A ZAB supervisor; investigating a TCAS conflict event; discovered a misconception he and other controller's had regarding the limitations of various types of TCAS equipment.

Narrative: I became aware Aircraft X was flying in our airspace to Siver City; New Mexico. I was curious why this aircraft had not responded to a TCAS RA. I asked the pilot to contact me once he was on the ground. He called and I asked him about the event. He informed me his TCAS equipment only provided TA's. The equipment just advises him where the traffic and changes color as it becomes closer. I was not aware of any equipment in the system that did not provide an RA. I thought that's how the system works and why controllers are not to issue any clearances to aircraft responding to a RA. I have talked to numerous people; including people in AOV; since this discussion and no one was aware of this type of TCAS in the system. Air Carrier Y responded to a RA to descend due to the rate of climb of Aircraft X. Aircraft X on another frequency responded to a control instruction to descend back down to FL400. One aircraft responding to a RA; one aircraft responding to a control instruction sounds very similar to a midair in Europe. We are briefing our workforce on this information. If it is the case that TCAS equipment as described are in the system this information needs to be disseminated. There should be a way to recognize these types of equipped aircraft. If TCAS is the failsafe system for this type event then all aircraft should receive RA's to prevent a midair.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.