Narrative:

Due to winds, cvg was using runway 27 for all arrs and departures. Runway 27 has 2 entry txwys for full length departures, K2 and M2. Most aircraft, including ourselves, were going to enter runway 27 via taxiway K2. When we were #1 for departure off runway 27, tower cleared what we thought to be our aircraft into 'position and hold.' we read back this clearance. However, this clearance was apparently for a company aircraft with an almost identical call sign. This aircraft was located on M2 (opposite us) and whose 3 digit call sign was the same as ours except for the middle digit. This ambiguity was resolved while we were still well clear of the runway proper, but the nose of the aircraft was slightly past the hold line. ATC was advised and after the other aircraft departed, we departed uneventfully. Contributing factors were: 1) both aircraft with similar call signs were both #1 for takeoff on the only runway in use. 2) neither aircraft knew the other aircraft call sign. 3) antenna farm in close proximity to approach end of runway 27 engenders frequency bleed-over and can make communications difficult. 4) we did read back our instructions but probably the tower experienced simultaneous readback/hearback problems from 2 aircraft. There is no way to confirm a readback of this nature given current radio procedures.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF AN MD88 RESPONDED TO A SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGN AND STARTED TAXIING IN POS TO HOLD WHEN THEY NOTICED ANOTHER COMPANY ACFT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RWY. THEY HAD JUST PASSED THE HOLD LINE WHEN THEY RECOGNIZED THEIR ERROR.

Narrative: DUE TO WINDS, CVG WAS USING RWY 27 FOR ALL ARRS AND DEPS. RWY 27 HAS 2 ENTRY TXWYS FOR FULL LENGTH DEPS, K2 AND M2. MOST ACFT, INCLUDING OURSELVES, WERE GOING TO ENTER RWY 27 VIA TXWY K2. WHEN WE WERE #1 FOR DEP OFF RWY 27, TWR CLRED WHAT WE THOUGHT TO BE OUR ACFT INTO 'POS AND HOLD.' WE READ BACK THIS CLRNC. HOWEVER, THIS CLRNC WAS APPARENTLY FOR A COMPANY ACFT WITH AN ALMOST IDENTICAL CALL SIGN. THIS ACFT WAS LOCATED ON M2 (OPPOSITE US) AND WHOSE 3 DIGIT CALL SIGN WAS THE SAME AS OURS EXCEPT FOR THE MIDDLE DIGIT. THIS AMBIGUITY WAS RESOLVED WHILE WE WERE STILL WELL CLR OF THE RWY PROPER, BUT THE NOSE OF THE ACFT WAS SLIGHTLY PAST THE HOLD LINE. ATC WAS ADVISED AND AFTER THE OTHER ACFT DEPARTED, WE DEPARTED UNEVENTFULLY. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE: 1) BOTH ACFT WITH SIMILAR CALL SIGNS WERE BOTH #1 FOR TKOF ON THE ONLY RWY IN USE. 2) NEITHER ACFT KNEW THE OTHER ACFT CALL SIGN. 3) ANTENNA FARM IN CLOSE PROX TO APCH END OF RWY 27 ENGENDERS FREQ BLEED-OVER AND CAN MAKE COMS DIFFICULT. 4) WE DID READ BACK OUR INSTRUCTIONS BUT PROBABLY THE TWR EXPERIENCED SIMULTANEOUS READBACK/HEARBACK PROBS FROM 2 ACFT. THERE IS NO WAY TO CONFIRM A READBACK OF THIS NATURE GIVEN CURRENT RADIO PROCS.

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.