Narrative:

This report concerns air carrier flight cfc, bos to ewr. After arriving in bos 1 hour late, I called for clearance to ewr. Clearance delivery said he didn't have clearance for a cfc, but one for a cbi to ewr 30 mins ago. That would have been the XA00 departure. After consulting captain and check airman, who was giving a line check, we agreed to take the cbi clearance from ATC and call our flight cfc to dispatch. The problem is, flight cbi was the XB00 departure, so when they called for a clearance, it was already taken. I believe this miscom resulted from the clearance delivery person thinking company flight cbi was the XA00 departure, rather than the XB00 departure. Or else I thought he said that company flight cbi was the flight that should have left 30 mins ago, at XA00. Therefore, thinking that there was no aircraft at XA00 but a flight plan for it, I accepted the clearance. The flight operated safely and uneventfully as flight cfc, but company dispatch thinks that we may have not been properly released because his paperwork showed us as flight cbi. The practice of swapping flight #south with dispatch and ATC had been a common practice in the northeast corridor for a long time. Now I find out that this practice is now frowned upon. Supplemental information from acn 181263: clearance delivery informed the first officer that there was no flight plan for flight cfc, but that there was a flight cbi slot available to them if they wanted it. The captain of flight cbi filed a formal complaint within the company against the captain of flight cfc.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT ACCEPTED A FLT PLAN FOR A COMPANY ACFT THAT WAS STILL PREPARING TO DEPART. CAPT OF OTHER ACFT FILED A COMPANY COMPLAINT AGAINST THE OFFENDING CAPT.

Narrative: THIS RPT CONCERNS ACR FLT CFC, BOS TO EWR. AFTER ARRIVING IN BOS 1 HR LATE, I CALLED FOR CLRNC TO EWR. CLRNC DELIVERY SAID HE DIDN'T HAVE CLRNC FOR A CFC, BUT ONE FOR A CBI TO EWR 30 MINS AGO. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE XA00 DEP. AFTER CONSULTING CAPT AND CHK AIRMAN, WHO WAS GIVING A LINE CHK, WE AGREED TO TAKE THE CBI CLRNC FROM ATC AND CALL OUR FLT CFC TO DISPATCH. THE PROB IS, FLT CBI WAS THE XB00 DEP, SO WHEN THEY CALLED FOR A CLRNC, IT WAS ALREADY TAKEN. I BELIEVE THIS MISCOM RESULTED FROM THE CLRNC DELIVERY PERSON THINKING COMPANY FLT CBI WAS THE XA00 DEP, RATHER THAN THE XB00 DEP. OR ELSE I THOUGHT HE SAID THAT COMPANY FLT CBI WAS THE FLT THAT SHOULD HAVE LEFT 30 MINS AGO, AT XA00. THEREFORE, THINKING THAT THERE WAS NO ACFT AT XA00 BUT A FLT PLAN FOR IT, I ACCEPTED THE CLRNC. THE FLT OPERATED SAFELY AND UNEVENTFULLY AS FLT CFC, BUT COMPANY DISPATCH THINKS THAT WE MAY HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY RELEASED BECAUSE HIS PAPERWORK SHOWED US AS FLT CBI. THE PRACTICE OF SWAPPING FLT #S WITH DISPATCH AND ATC HAD BEEN A COMMON PRACTICE IN THE NE CORRIDOR FOR A LONG TIME. NOW I FIND OUT THAT THIS PRACTICE IS NOW FROWNED UPON. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 181263: CLRNC DELIVERY INFORMED THE F/O THAT THERE WAS NO FLT PLAN FOR FLT CFC, BUT THAT THERE WAS A FLT CBI SLOT AVAILABLE TO THEM IF THEY WANTED IT. THE CAPT OF FLT CBI FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT WITHIN THE COMPANY AGAINST THE CAPT OF FLT CFC.

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.