ACR X UNINTENDED USE OF TCASII MADE TURN AFTER RECEIVING AN RA AND HAD NMAC WITH RA ACFT. PLTDEV.

Narrative

ACR X; B757; WAS ON SUSITNA RIVER VISUAL RWY 14 APCH; CLRED TO LAND. SMA Y; C172; WAS ON MCKENZIE SUBSTATION VFR DEP RTE. (SEE ENCLOSURES.) X WAS ISSUED TFC; INFORMED THAT THE TFC WOULD BE E OF FINAL; AND THAT THE TFC HAD HIM IN SIGHT. X SUBSEQUENTLY MADE A CLBING L TURN; WHICH ACTUALLY TOOK HIM DIRECTLY TOWARDS THE VERY TFC HE WAS APPARENTLY TRYING TO AVOID. HIS TURN ALSO TOOK HIM INTO A HIGH DENSITY VFR TFC AREA RIFE WITH NON-XPONDER EQUIPPED ACFT. THERE PROBABLY IS NO REAL REASON WHY TCASII CANNOT BE SAFELY INTEGRATED INTO THE SYS. IT SEEMS HOWEVER; THAT SOME PLTS ARE PAYING MOST; IF NOT ALL THEIR ATTN TO THE TCASII DISPLAY AND GIVING LITTLE THOUGHT TO THE OTHER; PROVEN MEANS OF RESOLVING TFC SITS (I.E.; VISUAL; CODED RTES; ETC). IN THIS CASE; THE PLT; AFTER GETTING THE RA; DECIDED TO TURN L; WHICH WAS NOT A SOUND DECISION. PERHAPS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF THE APCH PLATE DEPICTED THE HIGH DENSITY VFR TFC AREA E OF THE RWY 14 FINAL APCH COURSE. IN ANY CASE; THE PLT INITIATED TURN TOOK HIM INTO A FAR MORE HAZARDOUS SIT THAN IF HE WOULD HAVE JUST CLBED OR DSNDED ACCORDING TO THE TCASII. I SUBMIT THAT IF THE TCASII WAS KEPT IN THE TA MODE THAT CLOSE TO THE ARPT; AND THE PLT PAID ATTN TO WHAT ATC WAS TELLING HIM; HE PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE MADE SUCH A POOR DECISION. I CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER IF THERE ISN'T SOME PROB WITH ACR'S PROCS; TRAINING; ETC. SINCE THIS IS THE THIRD SIMILAR OCCURRENCE WITHIN A WK OF WHICH I AM AWARE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THE SUPVR HAD TALKED TO THE FLC OF ACR X AND ASKED WHY A TURN WAS MADE. FLC STATED THAT; FROM THEIR INTERP OF THE TCASII SCOPE; THE ACFT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS AT 12 O'CLOCK. THE FACILITY MGR TALKED TO THE ACR CHIEF PLT ABOUT THE COMPANY MAKING TURNS ON A TCASII RA. FACILITY MGR SAID HE WOULD HAVE THE AREA IN QUESTION PUT ON THE CHART.