Narrative:

We encountered several interesting comments from potomac approach control departing dca. We were located approximately 10-15 mi ese of buffr intersection when we were told to turn right to 330 degrees, then right to 340 degrees, then direct to buffr. Shortly thereafter, the controller told us to turn right to 060 degrees for DC9 traffic, a 90 degree turn. The DC9 traffic eventually appeared to us flying from right to left at a lower altitude. Upon clearing traffic, the controller told us to turn left to 280 degrees. We initiated a turn to 280 degrees at 307 KTS, 15-20 degrees of bank (using autobank mode with autoplt on) at 17000 ft MSL, a 140 degree turn. On 3 subsequent xmissions, the controller repeated the turn clearance and we repeated the same in response. As we turned during the exchange, the controller commented that his radar showed no turn even though we were clearly turning and we had turned 60-90 degrees already during this discussion. He also informed us that our turn was 'deplorable.' he then cleared us present position direct to mcray intersection and switched us to another frequency. During the comments back and forth between us, the controller was having additional difficulty with 2 other aircraft and their turn progress/procedure. At no time were we addressed as to increasing a rate of turn beyond normal to assist as necessary, but only that the radar 'does not lie' impute, implying that we were not in the turn as cleared by the controller concerning our normal rate of turn. I am at a loss of words as to how the controller handled, or rather mishandled, this situation. We could have helped or assisted as needed if such was requested, but another tack was chosen on the part of the controller and the opportunity for better communication was closed.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PCT DEP CTLR NOT HAPPY WITH THE WAY A B757 CREW WAS MAKING TURNS.

Narrative: WE ENCOUNTERED SEVERAL INTERESTING COMMENTS FROM POTOMAC APCH CTL DEPARTING DCA. WE WERE LOCATED APPROX 10-15 MI ESE OF BUFFR INTXN WHEN WE WERE TOLD TO TURN R TO 330 DEGS, THEN R TO 340 DEGS, THEN DIRECT TO BUFFR. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE CTLR TOLD US TO TURN R TO 060 DEGS FOR DC9 TFC, A 90 DEG TURN. THE DC9 TFC EVENTUALLY APPEARED TO US FLYING FROM R TO L AT A LOWER ALT. UPON CLRING TFC, THE CTLR TOLD US TO TURN L TO 280 DEGS. WE INITIATED A TURN TO 280 DEGS AT 307 KTS, 15-20 DEGS OF BANK (USING AUTOBANK MODE WITH AUTOPLT ON) AT 17000 FT MSL, A 140 DEG TURN. ON 3 SUBSEQUENT XMISSIONS, THE CTLR REPEATED THE TURN CLRNC AND WE REPEATED THE SAME IN RESPONSE. AS WE TURNED DURING THE EXCHANGE, THE CTLR COMMENTED THAT HIS RADAR SHOWED NO TURN EVEN THOUGH WE WERE CLRLY TURNING AND WE HAD TURNED 60-90 DEGS ALREADY DURING THIS DISCUSSION. HE ALSO INFORMED US THAT OUR TURN WAS 'DEPLORABLE.' HE THEN CLRED US PRESENT POS DIRECT TO MCRAY INTXN AND SWITCHED US TO ANOTHER FREQ. DURING THE COMMENTS BACK AND FORTH BTWN US, THE CTLR WAS HAVING ADDITIONAL DIFFICULTY WITH 2 OTHER ACFT AND THEIR TURN PROGRESS/PROC. AT NO TIME WERE WE ADDRESSED AS TO INCREASING A RATE OF TURN BEYOND NORMAL TO ASSIST AS NECESSARY, BUT ONLY THAT THE RADAR 'DOES NOT LIE' IMPUTE, IMPLYING THAT WE WERE NOT IN THE TURN AS CLRED BY THE CTLR CONCERNING OUR NORMAL RATE OF TURN. I AM AT A LOSS OF WORDS AS TO HOW THE CTLR HANDLED, OR RATHER MISHANDLED, THIS SIT. WE COULD HAVE HELPED OR ASSISTED AS NEEDED IF SUCH WAS REQUESTED, BUT ANOTHER TACK WAS CHOSEN ON THE PART OF THE CTLR AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR BETTER COM WAS CLOSED.

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.