Narrative:

Taxiing on ground control to runway 29 for a VFR departure in ewr we were instructed to contact approach control on 127.85 holding short of runway 29. After making radio call to approach control on 127.85 we were instructed to back-taxi to intersection romeo for departure. We complied. Waiting for takeoff clearance in position and hold, approach control read instructions which read something like: 'after takeoff fly runway heading to 1400', left turn over top the tower cabin direct to the statue of liberty, northbound up the hudson river...' the PNF read back the clearance and included 'cleared to takeoff.' the approach control facility replied, 'no, not that.' we rotated. Passing through about 500' AGL approach control said, 'commuter XXXX, you were not cleared for takeoff.' we replied, 'we are now airborne, what would you like us to do?' approach answered, 'fly the previously instructed procedure.' my copilot and I both believed that approach control had cleared us for takeoff; however, we are not positive. There was no question in our minds about the takeoff clearance until approach control said after we were airborne, 'you were not cleared for takeoff.' we also both believe this incident would have been avoided if the controller had just simply stated after our readback of the clearance, 'no commuter XXXX, you were not cleared for takeoff.' there was a breakdown in communication and a lousy choice of words which lead to the departure. We both thought that 'no, not that' was referring to part of the takeoff instruction which we read back wrong. It didn't present a problem because the departure procedure is quite standard and had been executed numerous time between us. Only the tape will tell whether or not the controller cleared us to go, but it's awfully strange that 2 pilots with a combined 7000 hours of flight tie were convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that we were cleared to depart.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMMUTER SMT, DEPARTING VFR FROM TCA ARPT, IS REFERRED TO CLRNC DELIVERY FREQ BY GND BUT MISTAKENLY BELIEVES IT TO BE DEP CTLR AND ASSUMES DEP INSTRUCTION TO BE TKOF CLRNC.

Narrative: TAXIING ON GND CTL TO RWY 29 FOR A VFR DEP IN EWR WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT APCH CTL ON 127.85 HOLDING SHORT OF RWY 29. AFTER MAKING RADIO CALL TO APCH CTL ON 127.85 WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO BACK-TAXI TO INTXN ROMEO FOR DEP. WE COMPLIED. WAITING FOR TKOF CLRNC IN POS AND HOLD, APCH CTL READ INSTRUCTIONS WHICH READ SOMETHING LIKE: 'AFTER TKOF FLY RWY HDG TO 1400', LEFT TURN OVER TOP THE TWR CABIN DIRECT TO THE STATUE OF LIBERTY, NBND UP THE HUDSON RIVER...' THE PNF READ BACK THE CLRNC AND INCLUDED 'CLRED TO TKOF.' THE APCH CTL FAC REPLIED, 'NO, NOT THAT.' WE ROTATED. PASSING THROUGH ABOUT 500' AGL APCH CTL SAID, 'COMMUTER XXXX, YOU WERE NOT CLRED FOR TKOF.' WE REPLIED, 'WE ARE NOW AIRBORNE, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE US TO DO?' APCH ANSWERED, 'FLY THE PREVIOUSLY INSTRUCTED PROC.' MY COPLT AND I BOTH BELIEVED THAT APCH CTL HAD CLRED US FOR TKOF; HOWEVER, WE ARE NOT POSITIVE. THERE WAS NO QUESTION IN OUR MINDS ABOUT THE TKOF CLRNC UNTIL APCH CTL SAID AFTER WE WERE AIRBORNE, 'YOU WERE NOT CLRED FOR TKOF.' WE ALSO BOTH BELIEVE THIS INCIDENT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF THE CTLR HAD JUST SIMPLY STATED AFTER OUR READBACK OF THE CLRNC, 'NO COMMUTER XXXX, YOU WERE NOT CLRED FOR TKOF.' THERE WAS A BREAKDOWN IN COM AND A LOUSY CHOICE OF WORDS WHICH LEAD TO THE DEP. WE BOTH THOUGHT THAT 'NO, NOT THAT' WAS REFERRING TO PART OF THE TKOF INSTRUCTION WHICH WE READ BACK WRONG. IT DIDN'T PRESENT A PROB BECAUSE THE DEP PROC IS QUITE STANDARD AND HAD BEEN EXECUTED NUMEROUS TIME BTWN US. ONLY THE TAPE WILL TELL WHETHER OR NOT THE CTLR CLRED US TO GO, BUT IT'S AWFULLY STRANGE THAT 2 PLTS WITH A COMBINED 7000 HRS OF FLT TIE WERE CONVINCED BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT WE WERE CLRED TO DEPART.

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.