Mid-air collision of 3 international flights averted over New Delhi!
 

According to the official, at the time of the incident, National Airlines' flight NCR 840 was on its way to Hong Kong from Bagram in Afghanistan while the KLM Flight KLM 875 was heading to Bangkok from Amsterdam. The Eva Air flight EVA 061 was flying to Vienna from Bangkok, the official said.
"First it was NCR 840, which was flying at flight level 310 (31,000 ft) and EVA 061 at flight level 320 (32,000 ft) which breached mandatory separation. The pilots of both the aircraft were alerted by the onboard TCAS warning system," the official said. Around the same time, the KLM flight was at 33,000 ft, he added.

Following the TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) warning, the pilot of NCR 840 sought to climb to 35,000 feet but was told to remain at that current level till the time it gets a go-ahead. "However, when the air traffic controller (ATC) observed it climbing, it was immediately asked to take a left turn. In the meantime, EVA also continued climbing at flight level 330, a level at which KLM was already flying, and at this time, another TCAS warning went off, alerting the pilots to steer the aircraft to a safer distance," the official said.

As the NCR 840 again descended to flight level 330, it came across the EVA flight, triggering another TCAS alarm, the official said.
https://www.dnaindia.com/india/repor...planes-2701651

FL 330 KLM 875 ->
FL 320 <- EVA 061
FL 310 NCR 840 ->

I stopped reading at "Stand by, expect FL350"...

yah, it's a bad call...I had an EY 320 departing Damascus read back an expect further climb...and next thing I know they climbed right up through my altitude, apparently ignoring the TCAS RA they must have been receiving as well...

FR24 History?
 

Is there any FR24 experts that can dig up and post a couple of screen shots for us?
Sounds like a fun day at the Fair, rolercoaster and all!

And you, BluSdUp, were the guy in another thread advocating TCAS as an alternative for aircraft to make approaches to a major airport which had an ATC systems failure! The above scenario enforces my point that TCAS is a useful aid but it's not by any means foolproof. In time, it will be interesting to see a factual report of the entire event.

Crossing traffic 1000ft above breaches mandatory separation?

Yes, puzzled me too. Delhi airspace is RVSM and I would have thought all three of those aircraft were RVSM compliant. That's why I'm waiting for more facts about what triggered this incident.

The Aviation Herald has one image that shows the positions quite neatly.
Incident: NAC B744 near New Delhi on Dec 23rd 2018, climb without clearance causes loss of separation with two aircraft
The reader's remarks below it (shown in anti-chronological order) strongly suggest what kind of misunderstanding developed resulting in the premature and unauthorized climb by the NCR 840 that created the loss of required separation.

<<got a clearance: EXPECT to climb to FL350>>

I've never heard that before; sounds inherently dangerous.

At FL320 EVA (level) and NCR (climbing) were on reciprocal headings,half a minute or so apart, when evasive action started
NCR was now trailing KLM by a mile or two, having been overtaken by KLM 10 min. before.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c02d0f6c29.jpg

Redbeard

It's p*ss poor phraseology but if you, as a pilot, consider that to be a clearance-and I hope you don't and it's a language misunderstanding, you'd better be careful out there. It in no way constitutes a clearance. Did we learn nothing from Tenerife? If in doubt-ask

Hotel Tango
With regards to Your post nr 7 here:
You got me wrong, I did NOT advocate using TCAS as a replacement for ATC in a procedure separated approach!
I did try to correct a rather scaremongering chap that claimed aircraft would collide over Birmingham , without ATC and or Radar at the field.
Glad to sort that misunderstanding.
Regards Cpt B

Airbus a321.
Have You considered the fact that this is wrong terminology from ATC, due to the fact that one little Double transmission actually makes it sound like the format of a clearance, Ie: " NRC 840 ( Expect to) climb to FL350" the ( being the double)?
This is why I love the Dutch at Maastricht :" XYZ Request FL 350 to cruise "
MAS: " Expect so!"

Anyway, Airbus a321, when the day once come, and it will , when You make Your first mistake, lets hope it does not involve operating heavy machinery.

BluSdUp
Unfortunately, you were in such a hurry to insult me that you failed to understand the point of my post and that the extreme example I gave began with the word "IF". I did not suggest that it would happen but that it could happen. Many past aviation accidents have proved that anything can occur no matter how unlikely it may seem in theory. If you honestly believe that TCAS is 100% infallible in preventing a midair I beg to differ. Regardless what your personal point of view may be, there is no need to be insulting or condescending to make your point, especially when you failed to grasp the core issue which was that of liability.
Glad to sort that misunderstanding.

[QUOTE " Expect so!"
][/QUOTE]

More non standard phraseology. How about "maintain FL??? I will call you when/if higher becomes available"