Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Distraction; Situational Awareness
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
We were being vectored onto the ILS approach Runway 26 into PHX. There was an Airbus that was being vectored on to the parallel approach for 25L into PHX. Because we were both intercepting our respective localizers at the same lateral point from the field; we got an RA to descend. The TCAS did exactly what it was supposed to do- it doesn't know that we are intercepting a localizer; and so it sees two airplanes that are opposite direction and converging and issues the RA command. The Captain turned off the autopilot; turned away slightly from the traffic; and descended approximately 300 feet. We had the traffic in sight the entire time; and we were able to stabilize the aircraft before the '1;000 ft above the field' call out. Why does ATC keep on having aircraft on parallel approaches intercept parallel localizers at the same lateral point? If they would space it out by a mile; this wouldn't happen. And if it's happened to me twice now in the last 6 months; it must be happening to other people as well.
While on the visual approach to Runway 26 we received a Descent TA.  Another aircraft was on approach to 25L and also joining final.  We had the aircraft in sight and we also complied with the TA and started a descent.  Our position was just outside PRUNN on approach to Runway 26.  We were at 3;000 [feet]; and descent was to approximately 2;700 [feet].  We then leveled off and joined the glide slope and landed on Runway 26. ATC was notified of the TA.
Air carrier flight crew reported descending in response to an RA from an opposite direction Airbus on approach to PHX.