Narrative:

In the preflight period the crew called for the pre departure clearance on the aircraft's ACARS radio and was not sure if they had ever received the clearance to fly into controled airspace. The first indication of a problem occurred after takeoff. Departure control asked the crew to squawk a particular code, which we were not presently squawking. Looking at the messages on the ACARS, the pre departure clearance message may have dropped off the page, due to the numerous messages that were requested and received. In the preflight, maintenance was conducting numerous jobs in the cockpit. The conclusion of all this maintenance work resulted in 2 MEL's having been removed and leaving 2 MEL's (1 new and 1 old) on the aircraft. There was an abnormal start performed at the gate, due to the APU on MEL. Knowing the routing, flight plan that was filed, and having flown this particular flight numerous times, I thought the first officer had received the pre departure clearance. The first officer could not remember due to the workload at the gate. Interesting note: at no time did ground control or tower ever question if we had a clearance or flight plan. All checklists were performed, departure review and takeoff briefing were given, but were never challenged by the first officer against the pre departure clearance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MLG FLC FAILS TO INSURE THAT THEIR PDC WAS RECEIVED FOR THE UPCOMING LEG. THEY DEPART WITHOUT AN IFR CLRNC. PIC RPTR CITES DISTR DURING RAMP MAINT PROCS.

Narrative: IN THE PREFLT PERIOD THE CREW CALLED FOR THE PDC ON THE ACFT'S ACARS RADIO AND WAS NOT SURE IF THEY HAD EVER RECEIVED THE CLRNC TO FLY INTO CTLED AIRSPACE. THE FIRST INDICATION OF A PROB OCCURRED AFTER TKOF. DEP CTL ASKED THE CREW TO SQUAWK A PARTICULAR CODE, WHICH WE WERE NOT PRESENTLY SQUAWKING. LOOKING AT THE MESSAGES ON THE ACARS, THE PDC MESSAGE MAY HAVE DROPPED OFF THE PAGE, DUE TO THE NUMEROUS MESSAGES THAT WERE REQUESTED AND RECEIVED. IN THE PREFLT, MAINT WAS CONDUCTING NUMEROUS JOBS IN THE COCKPIT. THE CONCLUSION OF ALL THIS MAINT WORK RESULTED IN 2 MEL'S HAVING BEEN REMOVED AND LEAVING 2 MEL'S (1 NEW AND 1 OLD) ON THE ACFT. THERE WAS AN ABNORMAL START PERFORMED AT THE GATE, DUE TO THE APU ON MEL. KNOWING THE ROUTING, FLT PLAN THAT WAS FILED, AND HAVING FLOWN THIS PARTICULAR FLT NUMEROUS TIMES, I THOUGHT THE FO HAD RECEIVED THE PDC. THE FO COULD NOT REMEMBER DUE TO THE WORKLOAD AT THE GATE. INTERESTING NOTE: AT NO TIME DID GND CTL OR TWR EVER QUESTION IF WE HAD A CLRNC OR FLT PLAN. ALL CHKLISTS WERE PERFORMED, DEP REVIEW AND TKOF BRIEFING WERE GIVEN, BUT WERE NEVER CHALLENGED BY THE FO AGAINST THE PDC.

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.