G4 ARR AT EWR EXPERIENCED TCAS RA WITH OTHER ARR TFC; CITING CONCERNS REGARDING OVERALL ATC HANDLING BY BOTH APCH AND TWR CTLRS.

Narrative

APCHING TEB ON VECTORS FOR ILS 6 FROM THE S (JAIKE2); WE WERE GIVEN A TURN TO 090 DEGS (TOWARDS KNOWN TFC) TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 6 LOC AND A DSCNT FROM 5000 FT TO 3000 FT. AS WE BEGAN THE TURN; WE RECEIVED AN RA; RESPONDED BY FOLLOWING THE TCAS RA BY CLBING BACK TO SLIGHTLY ABOVE 5K AND NOTIFIED ATC. ONCE CLR OF TFC; WE THEN RAPIDLY DSNDED TO 3000 FT AND CONTINUED TO JOIN THE APCH COURSE. PRIOR TO BEING HANDED OFF TO THE TWR; WE WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN 170 KIAS. ONCE WITH TEB TWR; WE WERE ASKED TO SLOW TO MINIMUM APCH SPD (WHICH WE DID). THE PRECEDING ACFT (A CITATION) MISSED THE TURNOFF AND FAILED TO EXPEDITE TO THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY TO EXIT THE RWY. SINCE WE HAD YET TO RECEIVE LNDG CLRNC; I ASKED THE PLT MONITORING TO VERIFY WE WERE CLRED TO LAND. I ROUNDED OUT THE APCH BUT REMAINED READY FOR A GAR. WE RECEIVED LNDG CLRNC APPROX 700 FT DOWN THE RWY. I CHOPPED THE PWR AND LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. THE TWR CTLR THEN INSTRUCTED US TO EXIT THE RWY IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE GA FBO'S AND ONTO A TXWY THAT WAS BEHIND OUR ACFT! ONCE CLR; HE APOLOGIZED 'FOR THE MISCOM.' WHILE NO MISHAP/INJURY OCCURRED; TURNING AND DSNDING AN ACFT INTO KNOWN TFC WAS ONLY MITIGATED BY OUR HAVING TCASII. ALSO BY NOT ALERTING US TO THE POSSIBILITY OF THE NEED TO GO AROUND AND PROVIDING AT LEAST A HDG AND ALT FOR OUR POTENTIAL 'MISS' (IN SEVERE CLR VMC); THE TWR CTLR RISKED FURTHER CONFLICT WITH THE TFC INBOUND TO EWR. MY FO (PLT MONITORING) SUGGESTED A GAR AS WE PASSED 125 FT AT DZE -- I SHOULD HAVE INITIATED THE MANEUVER THEN. MY CONCERN WAS FOR POSSIBLE CONFLICTING TFC INBOUND ON THE VISUAL PORTION OF THE VOR-DME CIRCLING APCH AND OVERHEAD TFC INBOUND TO EWR. IN MY OPINION; TEB AS PRESENTLY HANDLED; REMAINS AN ACCIDENT JUST WAITING TO HAPPEN. I PERSONALLY KNOW MANY CREWS WHO (WHILE VISUALLY SEARCHING FOR TFC OR RESPONDING TO TCAS RA'S) HAVE BUSTED ALTS ON BOTH THE ARRS AND DEPS INTO AND OUT OF THIS ARPT. BOTH PROCS ARE COMPLICATED AND SEPARATION MINIMA ARE TIGHT WITH THE OTHER TFC IN THE NYC METRO AREA. HONEYWELL'S FMS DATABASE FOR THE TEB5 STILL SHOWS RWY HDG UNTIL 1500 FT AS AN 'AT OR ABOVE' ALT BEFORE THE TURN TO 280 DEGS; WHILE THE DEP REQUIRES LEVELING AT 1500 FT; TURNING TO 280 DEGS; AND MAINTAINING 1500 FT UNTIL 4.5 DME FROM TEB BEFORE CLBING TO 2000 FT. THIS RENDERS VNAV USELESS FOR THE TEB5; WHILE LEADING CREWS TOWARDS THE FALSE SENSE THAT BY USING LNAV/VNAV THAT THE ALT REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEP WILL BE MET. AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ABOUT EXTENDED VECTORING OF JET ACFT BELOW THE FLOOR OF CLASS B AIRSPACE AT THE OMNI DIRECTIONAL VFR ALT OF 3000 FT MSL WHILE INBOUND FOR THE VOR-DME CIRCLING APCH INTO TEB!