Narrative:

Medium large transport xxab was told to taxi into position and hold runway 25R. Xxcd was cleared for takeoff. Xxab rolled. Xxcd was told to turn left heading 220 degrees and told to contact lax departure. Xxab acknowledged. I didn't hear xxab reply and xxab did not hear me say xxcd. I have been removed from duties (decertified). I was told the flight crew would not be violated or even made aware of their mistake. I have been told if I do not recertify, I would be transferred to another facility. I feel this is an overreaction by management. To prevent this problem from happening, I would strongly suggest eliminating the 4 digit call signs for air carrier's. We have to repeat the call signs so many times because there are too many numbers. I know if the aircraft was company ab or company clearance delivery, the occurrence never would have happened. We also have to use 3 letter call signs, ie xxl ab. It is too much to read in a limited space (flight progress strips and radar scopes). Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following. Reporter's main concern about this call sign problem was the fact that she was given an official reprimand for not catching the pilot's mistake after she had given the correct instruction, and nothing was done or even said to the flight crew for their mistake. Reporter feels that the 4 digit call sign trend is a dangerous one and would like to see something done about it. Analyst suggested to her that she do some mathematical research and then make a formal suggestion through FAA channels about the use of one, 2 and 3 number combinations by air carrier companies. Another concern that was expressed by reporter was the new 3 letter call signs used for all air carrier companies now, and how this has created problems on both flight progress strips and 'on scope' a/north's. This one doesn't seem to lend itself to a solution.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG TOOK OFF WITH CLRNC MEANT FOR AN ACFT OF THE SAME COMPANY WITH SIMILAR CALL SIGN.

Narrative: MLG XXAB WAS TOLD TO TAXI INTO POS AND HOLD RWY 25R. XXCD WAS CLRED FOR TKOF. XXAB ROLLED. XXCD WAS TOLD TO TURN LEFT HDG 220 DEGS AND TOLD TO CONTACT LAX DEP. XXAB ACKNOWLEDGED. I DIDN'T HEAR XXAB REPLY AND XXAB DID NOT HEAR ME SAY XXCD. I HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM DUTIES (DECERTIFIED). I WAS TOLD THE FLT CREW WOULD NOT BE VIOLATED OR EVEN MADE AWARE OF THEIR MISTAKE. I HAVE BEEN TOLD IF I DO NOT RECERTIFY, I WOULD BE TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER FAC. I FEEL THIS IS AN OVERREACTION BY MGMNT. TO PREVENT THIS PROB FROM HAPPENING, I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST ELIMINATING THE 4 DIGIT CALL SIGNS FOR ACR'S. WE HAVE TO REPEAT THE CALL SIGNS SO MANY TIMES BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY NUMBERS. I KNOW IF THE ACFT WAS COMPANY AB OR COMPANY CD, THE OCCURRENCE NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. WE ALSO HAVE TO USE 3 LETTER CALL SIGNS, IE XXL AB. IT IS TOO MUCH TO READ IN A LIMITED SPACE (FLT PROGRESS STRIPS AND RADAR SCOPES). CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING. RPTR'S MAIN CONCERN ABOUT THIS CALL SIGN PROB WAS THE FACT THAT SHE WAS GIVEN AN OFFICIAL REPRIMAND FOR NOT CATCHING THE PLT'S MISTAKE AFTER SHE HAD GIVEN THE CORRECT INSTRUCTION, AND NOTHING WAS DONE OR EVEN SAID TO THE FLT CREW FOR THEIR MISTAKE. RPTR FEELS THAT THE 4 DIGIT CALL SIGN TREND IS A DANGEROUS ONE AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING DONE ABOUT IT. ANALYST SUGGESTED TO HER THAT SHE DO SOME MATHEMATICAL RESEARCH AND THEN MAKE A FORMAL SUGGESTION THROUGH FAA CHANNELS ABOUT THE USE OF ONE, 2 AND 3 NUMBER COMBINATIONS BY ACR COMPANIES. ANOTHER CONCERN THAT WAS EXPRESSED BY RPTR WAS THE NEW 3 LETTER CALL SIGNS USED FOR ALL ACR COMPANIES NOW, AND HOW THIS HAS CREATED PROBS ON BOTH FLT PROGRESS STRIPS AND 'ON SCOPE' A/N'S. THIS ONE DOESN'T SEEM TO LEND ITSELF TO A SOLUTION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.