ACR X TCASII RA WITH ACFT Y. ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC UNAUTHORIZED CLB FROM ASSIGNED ALT. PLTDEV.

Narrative

ACR X WAS INBOUND TO PHL ON THE BUCKS 2 ARR; WAS INFORMED OF TFC AT 10500 FT OVER LRP. AS ACFT WAS SIGHTED BY PNF; A RA WAS ISSUED BY THE TCASII COMMANDING A CLB GREATER THAN 1500 FPM. CTR WAS INFORMED THAT ACR X WAS IN A CLB IN RESPONSE TO A RA AND THAT THE PREVIOUSLY CALLED TFC WAS IN SIGHT. THE CTLR THEN STARTED TO ASK NUMEROUS QUESTIONS WHICH DEMONSTRATED HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE TCASII SYS WAS DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT THAN THAT WHICH THIS PLT WAS TAUGHT AND IS THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN APPLICABLE DIRECTIVES. SPECIFICALLY THE CTLR ASKED: 1) IF WE WERE RESPONDING TO THE TCASII EVEN THOUGH WE HAD THE ACFT Y IN SIGHT? COMPANY MANUALS DICTATE THAT RA WILL BE FOLLOWED UNLESS DOING SO WOULD PUT THE FLT IN DANGER. 2) IF WE HAD MORE THAN ONE RA? I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT EXCEEDS THE CAPABILITIES OF THE SYS. 3) WAS THE CALLED TFC THE TFC CAUSING THE RA? I AM NOT AWARE THAT VISUAL AND TFC DISPLAYED ON THE TCASII CAN BE POSITIVELY CORRELATED. BOTTOM LINE: CTLR SOUNDED LIKE HE WAS CONDUCTING AN INQUISITION AND KNEW LITTLE OF THE SYS HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.