SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT. FLC SEES AND AVOIDS OTHER TFC; BUT IN ERROR; USES THE TERM TCASII WHEN INFORMING THE CTLR. THE CTLR DOES NOT SEE THE OTHER TFC ON HIS RADAR AND OPENLY DOUBTS THEIR RPT.

Narrative

ARRIVED EARLIER AT BDR ARPT; PICKED UP PAX; TAXIED OUT FOR DEP TO BOSTON. VERY NICE SUNDAY; GREAT WX; LOTS OF SMALL AIRPLANES FLYING. TWR SAYS TO TAXI INTO POS AND HOLD RWY 24. WE PROCEED TO BACK-TAXI; NOTICE SMALL ACFT ON FINAL; INFORM TWR OF THIS. TWR TELLS THAT ACFT TO GO AROUND AND MAKE L TFC. TWR THEN CLRS US FOR TKOF. THE SMALL ACFT STILL HAS NOT TURNED L. TWR AGAIN TELLS THAT ACFT TO MAKE L TFC. HE STILL DOES NOT AND IS DRIFTING R. TWR THEN TELLS ACFT TO TURN R; BUT AGAIN ACFT DOES NOT. AFTER TKOF WE TURN SLIGHTLY L TO AVOID OVERTAKING HIM. NO CONFLICT. WE CHANGE FREQ TO DEP. NOW HERE IS THE 'INTERESTING' PART OF THE STORY. WE CLB TO 2000 FT MSL AS ASSIGNED; TURN TO ASSIGNED HDG OF 090 DEGS (THEREABOUTS). THEN DEP GIVES US A CLB TO 3000 FT MSL ON A HDG OF 060 DEGS. ESTABLISHED AT 3000 FT AND ON THE 060 DEG HDG; I SEE CONVERGING TFC AT 1:30 - 2 O'CLOCK POS; CESSNA SINGLE ENG 172; MAYBE 1/4 - 1/2 MI AWAY AT PROBABLY 2900-3000 FT MSL. HE IS CONVERGING. I ANNOUNCE TFC TO PF; HE SEES TFC AND INITIATES A CLB. AS I REACH FOR THE MIKE TO ADVISE ATC OF THE TFC AND OUR CLB; OTHER PLT SAYS 'TELL HIM WE'RE CLBING TO A TCASII COMMAND.' I TELL ATC 'XXX CLBING FOR TCASII TFC.' THIS ALL HAPPENED ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY. ATC SAYS 'I DON'T SEE ANY TFC OUT THERE' AND 'YOU HAVE SAAB TFC ABOVE YOU AT 4000 FT.' WE KNEW; AND HAD SEEN; THE SAAB. HE WAS AT 4000 FT; BUT ALSO WAS BEHIND US. ATC THEN ASKED SAAB; 'DO YOU SHOW TCASII TFC AT 3000 FT?' SAAB SAID NO. BY NOW WE HAVE PASSED OVER TFC AND STARTED TO DSND. THE HIGHEST WE GOT WAS 3600 FT MSL BRIEFLY. AS WE DSND THROUGH 3400 FT; ATC SAYS HE SAW NO TFC; THAT WE HAD IFR TFC (THE SAAB) AT 4000 FT. THAT HE WOULD WRITE UP OUR ALTDEV; THEN SAYS CLB TO 9000 FT. WE PROCEEDED UNEVENTFULLY. NOW THAT THINGS HAD CALMED DOWN; WE REALIZED WE DID NOT GET A TCASII COMMAND! ATC AND THE SAAB DID NOT 'SEE' HIM BECAUSE HE DID NOT USE A XPONDER! WE HAVE HAD TCASII ABOUT 2 YRS. IT IS A GREAT TOOL. OPERATING IN THE NE; WE GET OCCASIONAL RA'S. WE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO TCASII CALLOUTS. THAT IS WHY I INCORRECTLY USED 'CLBING FOR TCASII COMMAND.' THE TFC WAS THERE; AND I BELIEVE A MIDAIR COLLISION MAY HAVE OCCURRED HAD WE NOT TAKEN EVASIVE ACTION. WE DID THE RIGHT THING. WE ARE ALIVE. OUR ERROR; IN THE INTENSITY OF THE EVENT; WAS INCORRECT TERMINOLOGY OF OUR ACTIONS; AND THE ASSUMPTION THAT TCASII WAS 'CALLING.' TCASII IS A GREAT TOOL; BUT SCANNING WILL STILL SAVE YOUR LIFE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THIS FLC WAS FLYING A CORPORATE CITATION III AND THEIR PRIMARY PROB IN THIS EVENT IS THAT THEY IMPROPERLY USED THE TERMINOLOGY TCASII INSTEAD OF AVOIDING TFC IN SIGHT. SINCE THE CTLR DID NOT SEE THE INTRUDER ON HIS SCOPE; HE ASSUMED THAT IT WAS NOT THERE WHEN THE FLC USED THE IMPROPER TERMINOLOGY. THE FLC RECOGNIZES THEIR ERROR; BUT AT THE SAME TIME THEY THINK THAT THE CTLR WAS A BIT TOO AGGRESSIVE TOWARD THEM. THEY HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THE FAA. THE ORIGINAL ACFT THAT THE FLC SAW WAS A CESSNA 172 (A VERY OLD MODEL) WITH A SINGLE PERSON ON BOARD. THIS ACFT NEVER CHANGED COURSE OR ALT AND THE RPTRS DO NOT THINK HE SAW ANY OF THE OTHER TFC.