Flight crew of an MD88 responded to clearance by approach controller for another similar sounding same company call sign. Since the clearance was a clearance for a visual approach and contact tower, which the reporter did, the tower noticed the mistake and instructed reporter to do a right 360 degree turn and follow the originally cleared aircraft for approach and landing.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	415010
Time
Date	199809
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mke
State Reference	WI
Altitude	msl bound lower : 2500 msl bound upper : 2500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : mke tower : mke
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-88
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : visual arrival other
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	arrival other arrival star : star
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 9850 flight time type : 6000
ASRS Report	415010
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Being radar vectored on downwind for a visual approach, company with similar sounding call sign was cleared for the visual. I (misunderstood?) thought the clearance was for my aircraft and responded as such and changed to tower frequency as instructed. Called tower and was cleared to land. Tower then instructed me to turn right as soon as possible as I had accepted the visual clearance in error(?). I then spotted company off my left on final, reported him in sight, and was reclred for the visual to follow him. No horizontal/vertical conflict existed at any time. Suggest that controllers advise when there are similar sounding call signs in use and/or advise of sequence and traffic to follow when being sequenced for approach.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF AN MD88 RESPONDED TO CLRNC BY APCH CTLR FOR ANOTHER SIMILAR SOUNDING SAME COMPANY CALL SIGN. SINCE THE CLRNC WAS A CLRNC FOR A VISUAL APCH AND CONTACT TWR, WHICH THE RPTR DID, THE TWR NOTICED THE MISTAKE AND INSTRUCTED RPTR TO DO A R 360 DEG TURN AND FOLLOW THE ORIGINALLY CLRED ACFT FOR APCH AND LNDG.

Narrative: BEING RADAR VECTORED ON DOWNWIND FOR A VISUAL APCH, COMPANY WITH SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGN WAS CLRED FOR THE VISUAL. I (MISUNDERSTOOD?) THOUGHT THE CLRNC WAS FOR MY ACFT AND RESPONDED AS SUCH AND CHANGED TO TWR FREQ AS INSTRUCTED. CALLED TWR AND WAS CLRED TO LAND. TWR THEN INSTRUCTED ME TO TURN R ASAP AS I HAD ACCEPTED THE VISUAL CLRNC IN ERROR(?). I THEN SPOTTED COMPANY OFF MY L ON FINAL, RPTED HIM IN SIGHT, AND WAS RECLRED FOR THE VISUAL TO FOLLOW HIM. NO HORIZ/VERT CONFLICT EXISTED AT ANY TIME. SUGGEST THAT CTLRS ADVISE WHEN THERE ARE SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS IN USE AND/OR ADVISE OF SEQUENCE AND TFC TO FOLLOW WHEN BEING SEQUENCED FOR APCH.

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.