Narrative:

Scheduled air carrier flight lynchburg, va-charlotte, nc. Filed and cleared altitude 10000'. Near gso, center handed flight off to gso RAPCON. I was working radios. First officer was at controllers. I made initial call to gso approach: 'gso approach, company identify, 1-0-thousand.' gso replied, 'roger XXX, maintain 1-1-thousand.' I replied, 'roger, XXX is out of (or leaving) 10 for 1-1-thousand.' aircraft was climbed to 11000' and shortly after level off controller queried me, 'XXX, what is your altitude?' my reply: 'we checked in at 10, were told to maintain 1-1-thousand, and that's where we are.' controller said something that was unintelligible and cleared the flight back to 10000'. We complied. Because of his questioning my altitude (11000') and because he immediately cleared me back down to 10000', I have doubts whether the controller meant for the flight to maintain 11000' as directed by his reply to my initial call. I believe he misspoke and said maintain '1-1-thousand' when he really meant to say '1-0-thousand.' compounding the error was the controller's failure to respond to my acknowledgement, 'leaving 10 for 1-1-thousand.' a simple controller error--no real safety hazard in VMC, but IMC would have been an entirely different situation. Additionally, because of the adversarial relationship that exists between the FAA and the pilot community at large, this error if committed by a pilot probably would have led to license suspension and a large monetary fine. Why don't the same rules apply to controllers?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MDT ALT DEVIATION EXCURSION FROM CLRNC ALT.

Narrative: SCHEDULED ACR FLT LYNCHBURG, VA-CHARLOTTE, NC. FILED AND CLRED ALT 10000'. NEAR GSO, CENTER HANDED FLT OFF TO GSO RAPCON. I WAS WORKING RADIOS. F/O WAS AT CTLRS. I MADE INITIAL CALL TO GSO APCH: 'GSO APCH, COMPANY IDENT, 1-0-THOUSAND.' GSO REPLIED, 'ROGER XXX, MAINTAIN 1-1-THOUSAND.' I REPLIED, 'ROGER, XXX IS OUT OF (OR LEAVING) 10 FOR 1-1-THOUSAND.' ACFT WAS CLBED TO 11000' AND SHORTLY AFTER LEVEL OFF CTLR QUERIED ME, 'XXX, WHAT IS YOUR ALT?' MY REPLY: 'WE CHKED IN AT 10, WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN 1-1-THOUSAND, AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.' CTLR SAID SOMETHING THAT WAS UNINTELLIGIBLE AND CLRED THE FLT BACK TO 10000'. WE COMPLIED. BECAUSE OF HIS QUESTIONING MY ALT (11000') AND BECAUSE HE IMMEDIATELY CLRED ME BACK DOWN TO 10000', I HAVE DOUBTS WHETHER THE CTLR MEANT FOR THE FLT TO MAINTAIN 11000' AS DIRECTED BY HIS REPLY TO MY INITIAL CALL. I BELIEVE HE MISSPOKE AND SAID MAINTAIN '1-1-THOUSAND' WHEN HE REALLY MEANT TO SAY '1-0-THOUSAND.' COMPOUNDING THE ERROR WAS THE CTLR'S FAILURE TO RESPOND TO MY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, 'LEAVING 10 FOR 1-1-THOUSAND.' A SIMPLE CTLR ERROR--NO REAL SAFETY HAZARD IN VMC, BUT IMC WOULD HAVE BEEN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SITUATION. ADDITIONALLY, BECAUSE OF THE ADVERSARIAL RELATIONSHIP THAT EXISTS BTWN THE FAA AND THE PLT COMMUNITY AT LARGE, THIS ERROR IF COMMITTED BY A PLT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE LED TO LICENSE SUSPENSION AND A LARGE MONETARY FINE. WHY DON'T THE SAME RULES APPLY TO CTLRS?

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.