Air carrier X had less than standard separation from aircraft Y. System error.

Attributes
ACN	149402
Time
Date	199006
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : dfw
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl bound lower : 23000 msl bound upper : 24500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zfw
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 17000 flight time type : 1500
ASRS Report	149402
Person 2
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	faa : investigated faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	vertical : 500
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

When dfw tower cleared air carrier X into position for takeoff, they advised us to use caution, the aircraft that took off ahead of us had the same flight number (different air carrier). We acknowledged. I always try to use correct radio procedure anyway (even normally state my call sign at the beginning of my transmission), but because of the situation with the same flight numbers, I used extra caution on this flight. Ft worth center had cleared us to FL230. We were level at FL230 when we were given a frequency change. I had to check in on the new frequency 2 or 3 times before center responded. The last time I called I asked center how he heard us. He acknowledged our check in, said that was the first time he heard us, and cleared us up to FL330. We commenced climb. When leaving FL24.5, center asked our altitude. I replied, and center advised us the climb was for another aircraft. I advised him that I had read back the clearance. He then told us to maintain FL270. At this time, from the sound of his voice, I believe he realized he had confused the two aircraft. I asked if there was a traffic conflict. He said yes, but aircraft Y was behind us now and was no factor. We were then given another frequency change and continued the flight west/O incident. After landing I asked our ATC specialist in flight control to check into this situation for me. He was advised by the supervisor on duty in ft worth center that the tapes had been pulled, there was in fact an operational error on the part of the controller, and that we had operated in accordance with proper procedures and were in no way at fault. Through the ATC computer network, I would like to see them prohibit two aircraft with the same flight number from operating with the same ATC facility at the same time (within the same time frame). One flight could be given another call sign for ATC purposes only. If ATC can't do this, then air traffic area should take it upon themselves to do it. No matter how careful we try to be, a disaster is waiting to happen because of similar flight numbers.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X HAD LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION FROM ACFT Y. SYSTEM ERROR.

Narrative: WHEN DFW TWR CLRED ACR X INTO POS FOR TKOF, THEY ADVISED US TO USE CAUTION, THE ACFT THAT TOOK OFF AHEAD OF US HAD THE SAME FLT NUMBER (DIFFERENT AIR CARRIER). WE ACKNOWLEDGED. I ALWAYS TRY TO USE CORRECT RADIO PROC ANYWAY (EVEN NORMALLY STATE MY CALL SIGN AT THE BEGINNING OF MY XMISSION), BUT BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION WITH THE SAME FLT NUMBERS, I USED EXTRA CAUTION ON THIS FLT. FT WORTH CTR HAD CLRED US TO FL230. WE WERE LEVEL AT FL230 WHEN WE WERE GIVEN A FREQ CHANGE. I HAD TO CHK IN ON THE NEW FREQ 2 OR 3 TIMES BEFORE CTR RESPONDED. THE LAST TIME I CALLED I ASKED CTR HOW HE HEARD US. HE ACKNOWLEDGED OUR CHK IN, SAID THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME HE HEARD US, AND CLRED US UP TO FL330. WE COMMENCED CLB. WHEN LEAVING FL24.5, CTR ASKED OUR ALT. I REPLIED, AND CTR ADVISED US THE CLB WAS FOR ANOTHER ACFT. I ADVISED HIM THAT I HAD READ BACK THE CLRNC. HE THEN TOLD US TO MAINTAIN FL270. AT THIS TIME, FROM THE SOUND OF HIS VOICE, I BELIEVE HE REALIZED HE HAD CONFUSED THE TWO ACFT. I ASKED IF THERE WAS A TFC CONFLICT. HE SAID YES, BUT ACFT Y WAS BEHIND US NOW AND WAS NO FACTOR. WE WERE THEN GIVEN ANOTHER FREQ CHANGE AND CONTINUED THE FLT W/O INCIDENT. AFTER LNDG I ASKED OUR ATC SPECIALIST IN FLT CTL TO CHK INTO THIS SITUATION FOR ME. HE WAS ADVISED BY THE SUPVR ON DUTY IN FT WORTH CTR THAT THE TAPES HAD BEEN PULLED, THERE WAS IN FACT AN OPERROR ON THE PART OF THE CTLR, AND THAT WE HAD OPERATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROPER PROCS AND WERE IN NO WAY AT FAULT. THROUGH THE ATC COMPUTER NETWORK, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM PROHIBIT TWO ACFT WITH THE SAME FLT NUMBER FROM OPERATING WITH THE SAME ATC FAC AT THE SAME TIME (WITHIN THE SAME TIME FRAME). ONE FLT COULD BE GIVEN ANOTHER CALL SIGN FOR ATC PURPOSES ONLY. IF ATC CAN'T DO THIS, THEN ATA SHOULD TAKE IT UPON THEMSELVES TO DO IT. NO MATTER HOW CAREFUL WE TRY TO BE, A DISASTER IS WAITING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF SIMILAR FLT NUMBERS.

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.