Bombardier/Canadair Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Procedure; Human Factors
When we switched to Springfield APP; we were told to expect a visual for runway 32. However when we looked outside we thought it looked overcast and not few at 400; as reported. Approach gave us a vector towards the airport; and cleared us down to 4000 feet; but then never got back to us. We even said that they must be either sleeping or working multiple frequencies because they forgot about us. We finally saw the runway; but by then we were on top of it. The PM then called approach and requested to be vectored back around for the ILS. We then got a heading to the left and instructions to descend to 3200 feet. And again ATC forgot about us. When we were 10 miles away from the airport the PM called approached and asked if we could be vectored back in. We then got a heading back towards the inbound course for the ILS 32. We felt ATC was not really paying attention because now it looked like he was never going to vector us on the right course to intercept. We again queried ATC and he said we would get a vector in 5 seconds. We were already paying extra attention because we did not get a comfy feeling with this ATC. At the same time we noticed a traffic on our TCAS at exactly our altitude of 3200 ft. That traffic was flying at our 12 o'clock position; through the final for runway 32. He got so close that we decided to avoid him. I disconnected the Auto Pilot (AP) and started turning left; towards the airport; away from him. At that time ATC came on and told us to climb to 4000 feet and turn right immediately on a 220 heading. At the same time we spotted the aircraft visually. It was a Cessna caravan and during the turn away from him I could almost see the pilot at the controls. I kept my eye on the traffic the whole time and told the PM to call out my altitude and heading. The PM saw on the TCAS that our positions on the 5 NM scale were on top of each other. I estimated us to have been less than 1 NM from each other. We never got a TA/RA probably because we had initiated an escape maneuver ourselves. After we were established on the 220 heading; ATC called us and apologized; saying he did not expect that traffic to be at the altitude and in that spot. We thought the traffic was scud running; but we may be wrong since he also was at exactly 3200 feet; he could have also been on an IFR flight plan. After all this we got vectored back around for another shot at the ILS 32. We landed without further incidents. I really do not know what could have avoided this situation on our side. We discussed ATC's lack of communication; and briefed about not doing the visual; but coming back around for the ILS. We were extra vigilant because we did not feel comfortable at all with how ATC was vectoring us and about the lack of communication. Then by the time we spotted the traffic on our TCAS we started talking about that immediately and we tried spotting the traffic visually. We took matters into our own hand initially by disconnecting the AP and turning away from the traffic. This was a near miss; and if we had not taken evasive actions we would have collided with the traffic. We are not sure if ATC was just not paying attention; or that he was working multiple frequencies and was thus overwhelmed.
CL350 Captain reported being given vectors for a visual approach to Runway 32 at BBG but could not spot the field and Approach Control was not responsive initially. A conflict developed with a C208 at their altitude and the crew evaded on their own; until Approach noticed and issued a new altitude and heading.