EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
We were at 10;000 FT between ESSPO intersection and the ORD VOR approximately ORD 150 deg radial at 10-15 DME and 300 KTS assigned speed when we were given a turn to heading 270 degrees. As Captain and PM I had just noticed a couple of TCAS targets when we received a TCAS RA to descend below the 10;000 FT. I confirmed that the F/O PF started to descend via the TCAS resolution as we did not have the target in sight and the TCAS showed the target only 400 FT above our altitude. I then called ORD Approach to let them know we were descending because of the RA and we were still above 250K. The ORD Controller responded 'oh yeah; there is a Citation at 10;500 FT.' Something similar happened to me last week; but without the airspeed issues; going into EWR on a 15 mile final to RWY 4R where ATC let some VFR guy go through the 'Final' at 500 FT below our altitude without notifying us. These situations are happening way too often anymore in NYC and ORD. Why do the controllers have to put traffic with such high speed closure rates i.e. 400-500K with less than 1;000 FT vertical separation?
The Captain of an ERJ-170; following his second TCAS RA in busy terminal areas incident within a week; took vocal exception to ATC permitting 500 foot vertical separation between IFR and VFR traffic in VMC conditions.