Narrative:

The flight originated from an airport which I do not normally use but is located in my home city and on the southeast rim of the indianapolis arsa. In advance of departing on an IFR flight, I contacted the indianapolis RAPCON by telephone and confirmed that my departure plan was appropriate and consistent with their program of arrs and departures. The route filed was 5i1 direct vhp (indianapolis VOR) direct oxi (knox, indiana, (V0R) direct landing mgc (michigan city, in) at 6000. Our flight departed VFR, turned to a heading of 040 and climbed to 2500 MSL. This kept the flight clear of indianapolis int'l arrs on runway 22. The altitude is commonly assigned in this area for local operations. Indianapolis approach control was contacted, informed or our position, altitude and that we were requesting our clearance. We were told to maintain 040, 2500, assigned a transponder code and told to remain clear of the arsa. We complied with all instructions. Very soon thereafter, we were told that we were in radar contact (and position given) and given the following clearance: '(aircraft call sign) is cleared to michigan city as filed, climb and maintain 6000.' our readback and mode C were confirmed and we began our climb. In the absence of further restrictions, we turned to fly present position direct to the vhp VOR as filed. Something 'felt' wrong, however. In retrospect, I think that it was that a controller who had worked me many times sounded 'off his game', tentative or distracted. After less than 1 min on the new heading, we 'queried ATC' to confirm that we were cleared to the VOR. We were rather brusquely told that we were assigned heading 040. When we countered that we had subsequently been 'cleared as filed', we were told that we had been assigned a heading and had not been given a turn on course. A turn on course followed within 1 min. On the handoff, we mutually acknowledged the confusion and parted friends. In this case we were well clear of the arrival corridor, but the possibility of far more serious consequences is apparent. To a person, each cfii with whom I have discussed the incident has maintained that 'cleared as filed' without further restrictions is a clearance to proceed as filed. I still have the nagging feeling that some ambiguity exists and I will continue to seek a definitive judgement. As a tangential consideration, I would normally consult with the accident prevention specialist at our GADO, but he was transferred to another capacity within the office and the position has gone unfilled for more than a year. The result has been a complete absence of FAA-sponsored meetings and safety seminars in the central state area for this period. I believe that this has very serious implications for the long-term safety of flight operations by pilots in our area, myself included.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT WAS ISSUED AN IFR CLRNC AFTER AIRBORNE AND DEVIATED FROM PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED ATC HEADING.

Narrative: THE FLT ORIGINATED FROM AN ARPT WHICH I DO NOT NORMALLY USE BUT IS LOCATED IN MY HOME CITY AND ON THE SE RIM OF THE INDIANAPOLIS ARSA. IN ADVANCE OF DEPARTING ON AN IFR FLT, I CONTACTED THE INDIANAPOLIS RAPCON BY TELEPHONE AND CONFIRMED THAT MY DEP PLAN WAS APPROPRIATE AND CONSISTENT WITH THEIR PROGRAM OF ARRS AND DEPS. THE ROUTE FILED WAS 5I1 DIRECT VHP (INDIANAPOLIS VOR) DIRECT OXI (KNOX, INDIANA, (V0R) DIRECT LNDG MGC (MICHIGAN CITY, IN) AT 6000. OUR FLT DEPARTED VFR, TURNED TO A HDG OF 040 AND CLIMBED TO 2500 MSL. THIS KEPT THE FLT CLEAR OF INDIANAPOLIS INT'L ARRS ON RWY 22. THE ALT IS COMMONLY ASSIGNED IN THIS AREA FOR LCL OPERATIONS. INDIANAPOLIS APCH CTL WAS CONTACTED, INFORMED OR OUR POSITION, ALT AND THAT WE WERE REQUESTING OUR CLRNC. WE WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN 040, 2500, ASSIGNED A XPONDER CODE AND TOLD TO REMAIN CLEAR OF THE ARSA. WE COMPLIED WITH ALL INSTRUCTIONS. VERY SOON THEREAFTER, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE WERE IN RADAR CONTACT (AND POSITION GIVEN) AND GIVEN THE FOLLOWING CLRNC: '(ACFT CALL SIGN) IS CLRED TO MICHIGAN CITY AS FILED, CLIMB AND MAINTAIN 6000.' OUR READBACK AND MODE C WERE CONFIRMED AND WE BEGAN OUR CLIMB. IN THE ABSENCE OF FURTHER RESTRICTIONS, WE TURNED TO FLY PRESENT POSITION DIRECT TO THE VHP VOR AS FILED. SOMETHING 'FELT' WRONG, HOWEVER. IN RETROSPECT, I THINK THAT IT WAS THAT A CTLR WHO HAD WORKED ME MANY TIMES SOUNDED 'OFF HIS GAME', TENTATIVE OR DISTRACTED. AFTER LESS THAN 1 MIN ON THE NEW HDG, WE 'QUERIED ATC' TO CONFIRM THAT WE WERE CLRED TO THE VOR. WE WERE RATHER BRUSQUELY TOLD THAT WE WERE ASSIGNED HDG 040. WHEN WE COUNTERED THAT WE HAD SUBSEQUENTLY BEEN 'CLRED AS FILED', WE WERE TOLD THAT WE HAD BEEN ASSIGNED A HDG AND HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN A TURN ON COURSE. A TURN ON COURSE FOLLOWED WITHIN 1 MIN. ON THE HANDOFF, WE MUTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGED THE CONFUSION AND PARTED FRIENDS. IN THIS CASE WE WERE WELL CLEAR OF THE ARR CORRIDOR, BUT THE POSSIBILITY OF FAR MORE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES IS APPARENT. TO A PERSON, EACH CFII WITH WHOM I HAVE DISCUSSED THE INCIDENT HAS MAINTAINED THAT 'CLRED AS FILED' WITHOUT FURTHER RESTRICTIONS IS A CLRNC TO PROCEED AS FILED. I STILL HAVE THE NAGGING FEELING THAT SOME AMBIGUITY EXISTS AND I WILL CONTINUE TO SEEK A DEFINITIVE JUDGEMENT. AS A TANGENTIAL CONSIDERATION, I WOULD NORMALLY CONSULT WITH THE ACCIDENT PREVENTION SPECIALIST AT OUR GADO, BUT HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER CAPACITY WITHIN THE OFFICE AND THE POSITION HAS GONE UNFILLED FOR MORE THAN A YEAR. THE RESULT HAS BEEN A COMPLETE ABSENCE OF FAA-SPONSORED MEETINGS AND SAFETY SEMINARS IN THE CENTRAL STATE AREA FOR THIS PERIOD. I BELIEVE THAT THIS HAS VERY SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LONG-TERM SAFETY OF FLT OPERATIONS BY PLTS IN OUR AREA, MYSELF INCLUDED.

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.