Narrative:

While in the arrival phase of our sfo-ord flight (FL240, 260 KTS assigned, 28 DME west of jvl VOR), ord center cleared us to cross jvl VOR at 16000 ft and 210 KTS. We accepted that clearance and read it back accordingly. Because of our distance from the jvl VOR, we decided it would have been difficult to comply with both altitude and speed requests, so I, the PNF, asked ord, 'chicago air carrier abc, do you need the altitude or the speed over jvl? It will be too tight for both.' in response, ord center replied, 'air carrier abc, just cross teddy at 10000 ft and then slow to 250 KTS' at which time my readback would have been 'air carrier abc, cross teddy at 10000 ft, then 250 KTS.' all 3 of these xmissions appeared ungarbled and clear, and at no time was there noticeable radio squealing, static, or apparent blocks. While in our descent through 13500 ft, ord center instructed us to level off at 14000 ft. I replied that we would climb back up to and maintain 14000 ft. Shortly thereafter, we were also instructed to turn to a northerly heading. Prior to our handoff to ord approach, ord center requested us to call them on the telephone upon arrival as we 'may have been involved in a possible operational deviation.' fortunately our voice recorder could have very closely verified the accounts of this episode as I have stated above. Unfortunately, we no longer have access to these recordings and ord center maintains the xmissions were 'garbled' or 'stepped on' or that we received a clearance meant for another company flight (while in our descent after receiving our clearance to cross teddy at 10000 ft then 250 KTS, we did hear the same clearance being given to company flight number defg). Two way communication dictates that if there is confusion at any time, further communication is required to clarify the situation. Why wasn't my readback of 'teddy at 10000 ft then 250 KTS' rectified if it indeed was for another aircraft (and I must add that it was in reply to my request for altitude and or speed relief to overheading jvl ord)? Supplemental information from acn 332487: the readback for mutual verification should be a pilot and controller's responsibility for effective 2-WAY communication.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE RPTING FLC WAS TOLD THAT A POSSIBLE OPERATIONAL DEV OCCURRED BECAUSE THEY ACCEPTED A CLRNC THAT THE CTLR MEANT FOR ANOTHER COMPANY FLT. THE FLC HAD RECEIVED A XING RESTR WHICH THEY HAD REQUESTED RELIEF FROM, AND THEN THOUGHT THAT THEY HAD HEARD AND READ BACK AN AMENDED CLRNC FOR A LATER XING RESTR.

Narrative: WHILE IN THE ARR PHASE OF OUR SFO-ORD FLT (FL240, 260 KTS ASSIGNED, 28 DME W OF JVL VOR), ORD CTR CLRED US TO CROSS JVL VOR AT 16000 FT AND 210 KTS. WE ACCEPTED THAT CLRNC AND READ IT BACK ACCORDINGLY. BECAUSE OF OUR DISTANCE FROM THE JVL VOR, WE DECIDED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT TO COMPLY WITH BOTH ALT AND SPD REQUESTS, SO I, THE PNF, ASKED ORD, 'CHICAGO ACR ABC, DO YOU NEED THE ALT OR THE SPD OVER JVL? IT WILL BE TOO TIGHT FOR BOTH.' IN RESPONSE, ORD CTR REPLIED, 'ACR ABC, JUST CROSS TEDDY AT 10000 FT AND THEN SLOW TO 250 KTS' AT WHICH TIME MY READBACK WOULD HAVE BEEN 'ACR ABC, CROSS TEDDY AT 10000 FT, THEN 250 KTS.' ALL 3 OF THESE XMISSIONS APPEARED UNGARBLED AND CLR, AND AT NO TIME WAS THERE NOTICEABLE RADIO SQUEALING, STATIC, OR APPARENT BLOCKS. WHILE IN OUR DSCNT THROUGH 13500 FT, ORD CTR INSTRUCTED US TO LEVEL OFF AT 14000 FT. I REPLIED THAT WE WOULD CLB BACK UP TO AND MAINTAIN 14000 FT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE WERE ALSO INSTRUCTED TO TURN TO A NORTHERLY HDG. PRIOR TO OUR HDOF TO ORD APCH, ORD CTR REQUESTED US TO CALL THEM ON THE TELEPHONE UPON ARR AS WE 'MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN A POSSIBLE OPERATIONAL DEV.' FORTUNATELY OUR VOICE RECORDER COULD HAVE VERY CLOSELY VERIFIED THE ACCOUNTS OF THIS EPISODE AS I HAVE STATED ABOVE. UNFORTUNATELY, WE NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO THESE RECORDINGS AND ORD CTR MAINTAINS THE XMISSIONS WERE 'GARBLED' OR 'STEPPED ON' OR THAT WE RECEIVED A CLRNC MEANT FOR ANOTHER COMPANY FLT (WHILE IN OUR DSCNT AFTER RECEIVING OUR CLRNC TO CROSS TEDDY AT 10000 FT THEN 250 KTS, WE DID HEAR THE SAME CLRNC BEING GIVEN TO COMPANY FLT NUMBER DEFG). TWO WAY COM DICTATES THAT IF THERE IS CONFUSION AT ANY TIME, FURTHER COM IS REQUIRED TO CLARIFY THE SIT. WHY WASN'T MY READBACK OF 'TEDDY AT 10000 FT THEN 250 KTS' RECTIFIED IF IT INDEED WAS FOR ANOTHER ACFT (AND I MUST ADD THAT IT WAS IN REPLY TO MY REQUEST FOR ALT AND OR SPD RELIEF TO OVERHEADING JVL ORD)? SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 332487: THE READBACK FOR MUTUAL VERIFICATION SHOULD BE A PLT AND CTLR'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR EFFECTIVE 2-WAY COM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.