Corporate flight crew reported confusion by controllers who cleared them to destination while the ne...

Narrative:

After departure while level at FL410 we were cleared direct to destination. Several minutes later and a couple of center handoffs we were queried exactly where we were tracking? We answered direct to lit VOR. The hou center controller said were were previously cleared direct to destination. The confusion comes when the VOR and airport are located in close proximity and share the same name/designation. We confirmed we were tracking to the VOR understanding the normal arrival clearance is usually cross 35nm from lit (VOR) and maintain 10;000. Which we were anticipating and had already programmed in our FMS. He said well it appeared that were were slightly diverging from a direct line to the airport. The VOR is 3.2nm on the 319 bearing to lit; so inbound from the southwest approx 175nm out the aim is pretty close. That said we complied and turned <2 degrees to the left to comply.fast forward to the next sector (mem center) we were give the anticipated clearance to cross 35 out of 'little rock' to maintain 10;000 which we read back and asked for clarification as to which location he wanted us to navigate to. The mem controller said 'I don't care which one you use.' which we replied we were previously corrected to comply direct to the airport. Again mem center said; 'either one is fine with me;' or something to that effect. We asked for and were recleared direct to lit VOR with the crossing restriction. Once changed over to little rock approach we were give a clearance to depart the VOR on a heading of 050 for vectors to ILS runway 22R. A clearance we have been receiving for many years when arriving from the south and the airport is on a south flow. Using the FMS systems enroute and being cleared to destination we most of the time have to track to comply with that request because to program an approach with an IAP located somewhere in the 15nm circle of the airport of intended landing skews the computers and confuses the issue putting the destination in from of said approach on the waypoint list. From a safety perspective our industry (pilots and ATC) needs to address the fact that off route clearances to airports co-located with navaids with exact same names needs to be clarified prior to issuance/accepting.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Corporate flight crew reported confusion by Controllers who cleared them to destination while the nearby VOR is the same identifier as the intended landing airport.

Narrative: After departure while level at FL410 we were cleared direct to destination. Several minutes later and a couple of Center handoffs we were queried exactly where we were tracking? We answered direct to LIT VOR. The HOU Center Controller said were were previously cleared direct to destination. The confusion comes when the VOR and Airport are located in close proximity and share the same name/designation. We confirmed we were tracking to the VOR understanding the normal arrival clearance is usually cross 35nm from LIT (VOR) and maintain 10;000. Which we were anticipating and had already programmed in our FMS. He said well it appeared that were were slightly diverging from a direct line to the airport. The VOR is 3.2nm on the 319 bearing to LIT; so inbound from the southwest approx 175nm out the aim is pretty close. That said we complied and turned <2 degrees to the left to comply.Fast forward to the next sector (MEM center) we were give the anticipated clearance to cross 35 out of 'Little Rock' to maintain 10;000 which we read back and asked for clarification as to which location he wanted us to navigate to. The MEM controller said 'I don't care which one you use.' Which we replied we were previously corrected to comply direct to the airport. Again MEM Center said; 'Either one is fine with me;' or something to that effect. We asked for and were recleared direct to LIT VOR with the crossing restriction. Once changed over to Little Rock Approach we were give a clearance to depart the VOR on a heading of 050 for vectors to ILS RWY 22R. A clearance we have been receiving for many years when arriving from the South and the airport is on a South Flow. Using the FMS systems enroute and being cleared to destination we most of the time have to track to comply with that request because to program an approach with an IAP located somewhere in the 15nm circle of the airport of intended landing skews the computers and confuses the issue putting the destination in from of said approach on the waypoint list. From a safety perspective our industry (Pilots and ATC) needs to address the fact that off route clearances to airports co-located with Navaids with exact same names needs to be clarified prior to issuance/accepting.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1408240
Time
Date	201612
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZHU.ARTCC
State Reference	TX
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Person 1
Function	Pilot Not Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Flight Instructor Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 100 Flight Crew Total 30000 Flight Crew Type 1500
Person 2
Function	Pilot Not Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 30 Flight Crew Total 1000 Flight Crew Type 10
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Track / Heading All Types

Corporate flight crew reported confusion by controllers who cleared them to destination while the nearby VOR is the same identifier as the intended landing airport.