Narrative:

I was the PF (first officer) on a transpacific flight from lax to osaka, japan. We were communicating with ZOA with ACARS data link via satellite. We were level at FL310. We requested a block altitude of FL310-FL350. ZOA responded 'unable due to same direction traffic, but your request remains on file.' approximately 21 mins later, ZOA sends us the following: 'ATC clearance oak 7, ATC advises flight XXX, FL350 (three-five-zero) is available, advise if requesting FL350 (three-five-zero).' since the captain was in the bathroom, I waited till he got back before I responded to ZOA. I told the captain that we were being offered FL350. I asked the captain if he wanted me to accept their offer. He said yes. I did so. He did not look at the hard copy of the clearance before having me climb the aircraft. The clearance was accepted by us at XX34, via data link. We began a slow climb (200 FPM) to FL350. The captain asked me if they want a report when level. This is when I realized there was a problem. We were at FL330 at XX14 when we reread the clearance and started back down to FL310. We were level at FL310 at XX45 at position N3759.0 W13942.4. We asked ZOA if we were cleared to FL350 via data link. He selcaled us on high frequency. He asked us what our altitude was. I told him level at FL310. He offered us FL350 in a subsequent ACARS clearance. We climbed to FL350 with no further problems. Contributing factors: we were expecting a climb clearance. The captain did not read the clearance until I found the problem. The ACARS data link procedures are totally different from fans! ATC used strange phraseology! That is totally unacceptable! Both pilots and controllers need to have a reference for standard contractions and abbreviations related to clrncs! My personal failure here was being complacent and anticipating the climb clearance. Lastly, I am very upset over the traps set by using data link and fans! We need to solve these problems! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter aired his biggest complaint about fans and data link (ACARS), which is the procedures are different, which caused him not to be certain what the message from ZOA meant. He waited for the captain to return to the flight deck to verify with him that it was appropriate to climb. He told the captain that he thought he had a climb clearance. The captain who was mentally prepared to climb, told the reporter to begin an immediate climb. When the captain was back in his seat, strapped in, he took time to read the clearance. He knew immediately that the written message was not a clearance, but instead, was an inquiry asking if the flight crew would like a higher altitude. Reporter would like standardized procedures for fans and data link (ACARS) to prevent any confusion over clrncs received by data link (ACARS). Supplemental information from acn 413152: first officer advised me as follows: 'we have been offered FL350 but I have not accepted it, I was waiting for you.' I then instructed him to accept FL350. Climb was started while I was still out of my seat. When I sat down I asked if they (ZOA) wanted a report level. The first officer then looked at the printed clearance and said, 'I don't think this is a clearance.' he immediately handed it to me and a quick review indicated it was not a clearance. It stated FL350 is available, advise if requiring FL350. First officer stated after event the ACARS screen confused him because of the accept/reject options under message. He thought he had accepted FL350 by selecting accept. We were at FL328 when realizing error and immediately returned to FL310. Sent message to ATC (confirm cleared to FL350). Commercial radio then called asking flight level. We responded FL310 which was then accurate and requested FL350. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter had just returned to the flight deck when the first officer told him that he thought they had just received clearance to climb higher. They had a request in to ZOA for a higher cruise altitude because an earlier request for higher had been denied. When the first officer stated that he thought he had clearance to climb, the captain reporter immediately jumped to the conclusion that the clearance had been received. After the reporter made it to his seat, strapped in, got caught up with the flight progress, he reviewed the written, printed message. He knew immediately it was an inquiry about higher altitude request and not a proper clearance. They had climbed 2000 ft from their last cleared altitude. Captain made a quick reversal from climb to descent. Excursion from altitude lasted for about 10 mins. Captain likes fans and this form of data link (fans) but, he knows the procedures are different and inexperienced flcs are frequently confused over the differences. In this case, he stated that if he had seen the printed form of the message, he never would have considered it a climb clearance.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B747-400 FLYING A PACIFIC RTE IN ZOA AIRSPACE BEGINS A CLB TO A HIGHER ALT WITHOUT CLRNC TO CLB. FLC (FO) HAS SOME CONFUSION OVER FANS AND DATA LINK (ACARS).

Narrative: I WAS THE PF (FO) ON A TRANSPACIFIC FLT FROM LAX TO OSAKA, JAPAN. WE WERE COMMUNICATING WITH ZOA WITH ACARS DATA LINK VIA SATELLITE. WE WERE LEVEL AT FL310. WE REQUESTED A BLOCK ALT OF FL310-FL350. ZOA RESPONDED 'UNABLE DUE TO SAME DIRECTION TFC, BUT YOUR REQUEST REMAINS ON FILE.' APPROX 21 MINS LATER, ZOA SENDS US THE FOLLOWING: 'ATC CLRNC OAK 7, ATC ADVISES FLT XXX, FL350 (THREE-FIVE-ZERO) IS AVAILABLE, ADVISE IF REQUESTING FL350 (THREE-FIVE-ZERO).' SINCE THE CAPT WAS IN THE BATHROOM, I WAITED TILL HE GOT BACK BEFORE I RESPONDED TO ZOA. I TOLD THE CAPT THAT WE WERE BEING OFFERED FL350. I ASKED THE CAPT IF HE WANTED ME TO ACCEPT THEIR OFFER. HE SAID YES. I DID SO. HE DID NOT LOOK AT THE HARD COPY OF THE CLRNC BEFORE HAVING ME CLB THE ACFT. THE CLRNC WAS ACCEPTED BY US AT XX34, VIA DATA LINK. WE BEGAN A SLOW CLB (200 FPM) TO FL350. THE CAPT ASKED ME IF THEY WANT A RPT WHEN LEVEL. THIS IS WHEN I REALIZED THERE WAS A PROB. WE WERE AT FL330 AT XX14 WHEN WE REREAD THE CLRNC AND STARTED BACK DOWN TO FL310. WE WERE LEVEL AT FL310 AT XX45 AT POS N3759.0 W13942.4. WE ASKED ZOA IF WE WERE CLRED TO FL350 VIA DATA LINK. HE SELCALED US ON HIGH FREQ. HE ASKED US WHAT OUR ALT WAS. I TOLD HIM LEVEL AT FL310. HE OFFERED US FL350 IN A SUBSEQUENT ACARS CLRNC. WE CLBED TO FL350 WITH NO FURTHER PROBS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: WE WERE EXPECTING A CLB CLRNC. THE CAPT DID NOT READ THE CLRNC UNTIL I FOUND THE PROB. THE ACARS DATA LINK PROCS ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM FANS! ATC USED STRANGE PHRASEOLOGY! THAT IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE! BOTH PLTS AND CTLRS NEED TO HAVE A REF FOR STANDARD CONTRACTIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS RELATED TO CLRNCS! MY PERSONAL FAILURE HERE WAS BEING COMPLACENT AND ANTICIPATING THE CLB CLRNC. LASTLY, I AM VERY UPSET OVER THE TRAPS SET BY USING DATA LINK AND FANS! WE NEED TO SOLVE THESE PROBS! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR AIRED HIS BIGGEST COMPLAINT ABOUT FANS AND DATA LINK (ACARS), WHICH IS THE PROCS ARE DIFFERENT, WHICH CAUSED HIM NOT TO BE CERTAIN WHAT THE MESSAGE FROM ZOA MEANT. HE WAITED FOR THE CAPT TO RETURN TO THE FLT DECK TO VERIFY WITH HIM THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO CLB. HE TOLD THE CAPT THAT HE THOUGHT HE HAD A CLB CLRNC. THE CAPT WHO WAS MENTALLY PREPARED TO CLB, TOLD THE RPTR TO BEGIN AN IMMEDIATE CLB. WHEN THE CAPT WAS BACK IN HIS SEAT, STRAPPED IN, HE TOOK TIME TO READ THE CLRNC. HE KNEW IMMEDIATELY THAT THE WRITTEN MESSAGE WAS NOT A CLRNC, BUT INSTEAD, WAS AN INQUIRY ASKING IF THE FLC WOULD LIKE A HIGHER ALT. RPTR WOULD LIKE STANDARDIZED PROCS FOR FANS AND DATA LINK (ACARS) TO PREVENT ANY CONFUSION OVER CLRNCS RECEIVED BY DATA LINK (ACARS). SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 413152: FO ADVISED ME AS FOLLOWS: 'WE HAVE BEEN OFFERED FL350 BUT I HAVE NOT ACCEPTED IT, I WAS WAITING FOR YOU.' I THEN INSTRUCTED HIM TO ACCEPT FL350. CLB WAS STARTED WHILE I WAS STILL OUT OF MY SEAT. WHEN I SAT DOWN I ASKED IF THEY (ZOA) WANTED A RPT LEVEL. THE FO THEN LOOKED AT THE PRINTED CLRNC AND SAID, 'I DON'T THINK THIS IS A CLRNC.' HE IMMEDIATELY HANDED IT TO ME AND A QUICK REVIEW INDICATED IT WAS NOT A CLRNC. IT STATED FL350 IS AVAILABLE, ADVISE IF REQUIRING FL350. FO STATED AFTER EVENT THE ACARS SCREEN CONFUSED HIM BECAUSE OF THE ACCEPT/REJECT OPTIONS UNDER MESSAGE. HE THOUGHT HE HAD ACCEPTED FL350 BY SELECTING ACCEPT. WE WERE AT FL328 WHEN REALIZING ERROR AND IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO FL310. SENT MESSAGE TO ATC (CONFIRM CLRED TO FL350). COMMERCIAL RADIO THEN CALLED ASKING FLT LEVEL. WE RESPONDED FL310 WHICH WAS THEN ACCURATE AND REQUESTED FL350. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR HAD JUST RETURNED TO THE FLT DECK WHEN THE FO TOLD HIM THAT HE THOUGHT THEY HAD JUST RECEIVED CLRNC TO CLB HIGHER. THEY HAD A REQUEST IN TO ZOA FOR A HIGHER CRUISE ALT BECAUSE AN EARLIER REQUEST FOR HIGHER HAD BEEN DENIED. WHEN THE FO STATED THAT HE THOUGHT HE HAD CLRNC TO CLB, THE CAPT RPTR IMMEDIATELY JUMPED TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE CLRNC HAD BEEN RECEIVED. AFTER THE RPTR MADE IT TO HIS SEAT, STRAPPED IN, GOT CAUGHT UP WITH THE FLT PROGRESS, HE REVIEWED THE WRITTEN, PRINTED MESSAGE. HE KNEW IMMEDIATELY IT WAS AN INQUIRY ABOUT HIGHER ALT REQUEST AND NOT A PROPER CLRNC. THEY HAD CLBED 2000 FT FROM THEIR LAST CLRED ALT. CAPT MADE A QUICK REVERSAL FROM CLB TO DSCNT. EXCURSION FROM ALT LASTED FOR ABOUT 10 MINS. CAPT LIKES FANS AND THIS FORM OF DATA LINK (FANS) BUT, HE KNOWS THE PROCS ARE DIFFERENT AND INEXPERIENCED FLCS ARE FREQUENTLY CONFUSED OVER THE DIFFERENCES. IN THIS CASE, HE STATED THAT IF HE HAD SEEN THE PRINTED FORM OF THE MESSAGE, HE NEVER WOULD HAVE CONSIDERED IT A CLB CLRNC.

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.