A CL65 flight crew may have descended to the wrong altitude while on approach to iad.

Attributes
ACN	599057
Time
Date	200311
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	navaid : aml.vortac
State Reference	VA
Altitude	msl single value : 3800
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : pct.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 270 flight time total : 4100 flight time type : 2100
ASRS Report	599057
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : overshoot
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : returned to assigned altitude
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : pct.tracon

Narrative:

On a vector and descent into washington dulles, we were asked what altitude we were descending to. I responded 3000 ft, as our altitude preselect was set to. Approach (potomac) responded, we should climb to 4000 ft. The captain swore we were given 3000 ft. I, the PNF, do not remember the altitude approach had given, but the preselect was set at 3000 ft, so we must have verified the altitude was correct. We, I responded to ATC, 'you gave us 3000 ft.' he said, 'I must have taken the wrong altitude from another aircraft.' 2 problems here: first, we are frequently given altitudes by approach that put us under the class B airspace with a speed restr above 200 KTS and left to us to somehow figure out where the airspace is. Second, we are required by our company to call 'in range' with our airport facilities. Both take away time and attention of the most important thing 'flying the aircraft.' we need some sort of graphical depiction on our FMS as to airspace and altitudes and we should only call our company for issues the company does not know about. Also, the communication system must be improved. If we had taken another altitude for another aircraft, someone should have known.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CL65 FLT CREW MAY HAVE DSNDED TO THE WRONG ALT WHILE ON APCH TO IAD.

Narrative: ON A VECTOR AND DSCNT INTO WASHINGTON DULLES, WE WERE ASKED WHAT ALT WE WERE DSNDING TO. I RESPONDED 3000 FT, AS OUR ALT PRESELECT WAS SET TO. APCH (POTOMAC) RESPONDED, WE SHOULD CLB TO 4000 FT. THE CAPT SWORE WE WERE GIVEN 3000 FT. I, THE PNF, DO NOT REMEMBER THE ALT APCH HAD GIVEN, BUT THE PRESELECT WAS SET AT 3000 FT, SO WE MUST HAVE VERIFIED THE ALT WAS CORRECT. WE, I RESPONDED TO ATC, 'YOU GAVE US 3000 FT.' HE SAID, 'I MUST HAVE TAKEN THE WRONG ALT FROM ANOTHER ACFT.' 2 PROBS HERE: FIRST, WE ARE FREQUENTLY GIVEN ALTS BY APCH THAT PUT US UNDER THE CLASS B AIRSPACE WITH A SPD RESTR ABOVE 200 KTS AND LEFT TO US TO SOMEHOW FIGURE OUT WHERE THE AIRSPACE IS. SECOND, WE ARE REQUIRED BY OUR COMPANY TO CALL 'IN RANGE' WITH OUR ARPT FACILITIES. BOTH TAKE AWAY TIME AND ATTN OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THING 'FLYING THE ACFT.' WE NEED SOME SORT OF GRAPHICAL DEPICTION ON OUR FMS AS TO AIRSPACE AND ALTS AND WE SHOULD ONLY CALL OUR COMPANY FOR ISSUES THE COMPANY DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT. ALSO, THE COM SYS MUST BE IMPROVED. IF WE HAD TAKEN ANOTHER ALT FOR ANOTHER ACFT, SOMEONE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.

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.