 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B777-200 captain reported a track deviation on an international flight stemming from a misunderstanding with ATC.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1313016 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201511 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | CZQM.ARTCC |
| State Reference | FO |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B777-200 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Cruise |
| Route In Use | Oceanic |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
We received our oceanic clearance from gander. It was an amended clearance including a different coast out point. We accepted the clearance and used the [LORAN] guide to check it. We input the revision and checked it. We then proceeded direct to the new coast out point. About two minutes later moncton center asked if we were going to the new coast out point. When we responded affirmative center advised us that the oceanic clearance was just that and did not include a domestic clearance to proceed to the coast out point. At the time we were using controller pilot datalink communications (cpdlc) for both domestic center contact and the oceanic clearance and we thought that we were doing what was expected. There was no other deviation and no loss of separation with any other aircraft.this was a misunderstanding as to the action required by a clearance issued via cpdlc. I think had we gotten the clearance via cpdlc and we were talking to moncton on the VHF rather than monitoring moncton on VHF as directed via cpdlc there would have been clear delineation between agencies but in this case we didn't catch the difference.this exact scenario is being given in this year's [training]. Highlighting this would have prevented this. I don't remember asking for a clearance to the new coast out point during the [training] either.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B777-200 Captain reported a track deviation on an international flight stemming from a misunderstanding with ATC.
Narrative: We received our oceanic clearance from Gander. It was an amended clearance including a different coast out point. We accepted the clearance and used the [LORAN] guide to check it. We input the revision and checked it. We then proceeded direct to the new coast out point. About two minutes later Moncton center asked if we were going to the new coast out point. When we responded affirmative center advised us that the oceanic clearance was just that and did not include a domestic clearance to proceed to the coast out point. At the time we were using Controller Pilot Datalink Communications (CPDLC) for both domestic center contact and the Oceanic clearance and we thought that we were doing what was expected. There was no other deviation and no loss of separation with any other aircraft.This was a misunderstanding as to the action required by a clearance issued via CPDLC. I think had we gotten the clearance via CPDLC and we were talking to Moncton on the VHF rather than monitoring Moncton on VHF as directed via CPDLC there would have been clear delineation between agencies but in this case we didn't catch the difference.This exact scenario is being given in this year's [training]. Highlighting this would have prevented this. I don't remember asking for a clearance to the new coast out point during the [training] either.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.