AN ACR LTT TOOK EVASIVE ACTION IN RESPONSE TO A COMMAND FROM ITS TCASII.

Narrative

WE DEPARTED IPT ON RWY 9. THE FO WAS THE PF. WE WERE FLYING THE SID OUTBOUND ON THE LOC WHEN OUR TCASII SHOWED A TARGET THAT APPEARED ON THE LOC AND APPROX 300-500 FT ABOVE US AND APPROX 2 MI IN FRONT OF US. AS OUR CLOSURE INCREASED; WE IMMEDIATELY LEVELED OFF AT 1500 FT AND TURNED SE 30 DEGS TO AVOID A CONFLICT. THE IPT CTLR THEN ASKED US WHY WE WERE NOT FLYING THE PUBLISHED SID AT WHICH TIME I EXPLAINED OUR ACTIONS DUE TO CONFLICTING TFC ACCORDING TO OUR TCASII. HE THEN SAID THAT THERE WAS TFC OFF OUR R DSNDING THROUGH OUR ALT INBOUND TO IPT AND I ACKNOWLEDGED THAT WE HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH THAT TFC. HE (IPT CTLR) THEN SAID THAT USING HIS BINOCULARS THAT HE SAW NO OTHER TFC IN THE AREA ESPECIALLY ON THE LOC AND ALONG THE SID PROC AND HE SUGGESTED WE GET OUR TCASII CHKED FOR ITS ACCURACY. I EXPLAINED THAT MY TCASII WAS ALL I HAD TO GO BY SINCE I HAD NO VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE TFC ALONG THE SID PROC AND MY TCASII WAS PAINTING 2 TARGETS; THE FIRST BEING THE TARGET ALONG THE SID PROC AND THE SECOND TARGET OFF OUR R WHICH WE HAD A VISUAL CONTACT. I MUST ALSO NOTE THAT DURING THE INBOUND LEG INTO IPT; WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH RWY 27 BY ZNY AND AS WE WERE DSNDING THROUGH 3000 FT AND INTERCEPTING THE LOC; WE RECEIVED AN RA TO CLB FOR TFC AND WE COULD NOT SEE ANY TFC. THIS HAPPENED APPROX AT THE SAME LOCATION AS OUR CONFLICT ON THE OUTBOUND LEG. WE NOTIFIED THE IPT CTLR OF OUR RA TO WHICH WE COMPLIED WITH AND HE DIDN'T SEE ANY TFC AT OUR ALT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 240579: UPON ARRIVING AT PHL WE WERE ADVISED TO CALL DISPATCHER. HE TOLD US THAT THE TWR CTLR HAD CALLED HIM AND ADVISED HIM OF OUR DEV FROM THE SID AND THAT HE HADN'T SEEN ANY TARGET.