Narrative:

Commercial flight, medium large transport X ewr pvd, on departure with ny departure control, heading 090 degrees on radar vectors with climb clearance to 9000'. We passed another jet (medium large transport Y, I believe) on a reciprocal heading at our altitude that seemed closer than normal. The controller pointed out the traffic at our 2 O'clock and when we queried him on its altitude and range, he said 7000' and 2 mi. We were passing 7000' at the time. No evasive action was necessary. I called the ny TRACON supervisor after landing in pvd to inquire what the normal spacing was on departures. He replied 1000' vertical and 3 NM horizontal. He added that if there was at least 15 degrees divergence of courses, though, that the controller could use less than 3 NM. On a subsequent phone call, he indicated that there would be a preliminary investigation for possible operator error. We were clearly not in a life threatening near collision situation. It surprised us to see a jet so close at our altitude, however, which raised the question of a deviation from normal procedures. If, however, 2 NM was the planned sep, then we are cutting it too close in such a busy area (and it was very busy that evening. We were given 5 turns/altitude changes within 3-4 mins).

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DEP CTLR CALLED TRAFFIC TO MLG ON OPPOSITE DIRECTION TRAFFIC AT SAME ALT, BUT WITH LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION. OPERATIONAL ERROR.

Narrative: COMMERCIAL FLT, MLG X EWR PVD, ON DEP WITH NY DEP CTL, HDG 090 DEGS ON RADAR VECTORS WITH CLB CLRNC TO 9000'. WE PASSED ANOTHER JET (MLG Y, I BELIEVE) ON A RECIPROCAL HDG AT OUR ALT THAT SEEMED CLOSER THAN NORMAL. THE CTLR POINTED OUT THE TFC AT OUR 2 O'CLOCK AND WHEN WE QUERIED HIM ON ITS ALT AND RANGE, HE SAID 7000' AND 2 MI. WE WERE PASSING 7000' AT THE TIME. NO EVASIVE ACTION WAS NECESSARY. I CALLED THE NY TRACON SUPVR AFTER LNDG IN PVD TO INQUIRE WHAT THE NORMAL SPACING WAS ON DEPS. HE REPLIED 1000' VERT AND 3 NM HORIZ. HE ADDED THAT IF THERE WAS AT LEAST 15 DEGS DIVERGENCE OF COURSES, THOUGH, THAT THE CTLR COULD USE LESS THAN 3 NM. ON A SUBSEQUENT PHONE CALL, HE INDICATED THAT THERE WOULD BE A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION FOR POSSIBLE OPERATOR ERROR. WE WERE CLEARLY NOT IN A LIFE THREATENING NEAR COLLISION SITUATION. IT SURPRISED US TO SEE A JET SO CLOSE AT OUR ALT, HOWEVER, WHICH RAISED THE QUESTION OF A DEVIATION FROM NORMAL PROCS. IF, HOWEVER, 2 NM WAS THE PLANNED SEP, THEN WE ARE CUTTING IT TOO CLOSE IN SUCH A BUSY AREA (AND IT WAS VERY BUSY THAT EVENING. WE WERE GIVEN 5 TURNS/ALT CHANGES WITHIN 3-4 MINS).

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.