Narrative:

Our aircraft, a 2 engine widebody transport, was dispatched non ETOPS due to a maintenance procedure that requires 5 legs to be flown prior to recertifying it for ETOPS. Our filed route was given to us as the cleared route and had been received as: from N6538 W060...sf...kk...N6523 W035...65N 030W...gimli...kef...aldan...61N 01235W...60N 010W...ben.... We proceeded on this course which was set up for airways that would keep our route within 60 NM of an airport at all times, when (on high frequency) iceland radio relayed a new clearance from reykjavik oac that read: from 6538N 060W...67N 050W...66N 040W...65N 030W...63N 020W...60N 010W...stn maintain 350 mach .80. We read back the clearance to iceland radio and advised them that we were non ETOPS today and would need to check with chicago dispatch prior to accepting the clearance for legality. I loaded the new route into route 2 and noticed it was fairly close to the original routing but could not ascertain its legality for a non ETOPS operation. We tried to send this routing via ACARS to dispatch but received no communication. We then asked iceland for a phone patch to chicago dispatch and gave him the number. The other first officer was trying to get through when iceland came back and said we must proceed by the new routing. We told him again that we were non ETOPS and they began asking us about navigation capability. We confirmed completely operational navigation capability but dispatched non ETOPS for maintenance considerations. We told them we would proceed to 67N 050W but still needed to verify its legality, after they insisted we proceed. Chicago dispatch finally was received by phone patch who advised us that we could not rerte and must stay on original routing. We advised iceland radio that we must return to the original routing. They had to relay to reykjavik oac and would call us back. We prodded them again to receive clearance on the original routing as we were unable the rerte and they again said they would check. Prior to sf we advised them we must proceed by the original routing and they again asked us about navigation capabilities, and they would check. At sf we advised them we were proceeding by the original routing and turned. 95 mins later we received ACARS message that said that the rerouting was valid and that he (the dispatcher) was sorry for any inconvenience. Iceland had advised us that a report would be filed as 067N 050W was within 50 mins legality. Supplemental information from acn 237816: we were unable to accept this clearance due to aircraft being dispatched non ETOPS due to an erratic automatic pressurization controller. We had great difficulty communicating our needs to reykjavik oac through iceland radio high frequency. When we informed them we were unable ETOPS we were repeatedly questioned about our navigation capability. It was extremely difficult to communicate with both the iceland high frequency operator and dispatch through the high frequency patch. In addition the language barrier plus a radio operator relaying control instructions between an aircraft and controller creates a chaotic condition when attempting to communicate all but routine information. Aircraft is TCASII equipped and no traffic was observed at all during this incident.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HDG TRACK DEV IN A NON ADHERENCE WITH ATC CLRNC INSTRUCTION. AMENDED CLRNC RTE CHANGE.

Narrative: OUR ACFT, A 2 ENG WDB, WAS DISPATCHED NON ETOPS DUE TO A MAINT PROC THAT REQUIRES 5 LEGS TO BE FLOWN PRIOR TO RECERTIFYING IT FOR ETOPS. OUR FILED RTE WAS GIVEN TO US AS THE CLRED RTE AND HAD BEEN RECEIVED AS: FROM N6538 W060...SF...KK...N6523 W035...65N 030W...GIMLI...KEF...ALDAN...61N 01235W...60N 010W...BEN.... WE PROCEEDED ON THIS COURSE WHICH WAS SET UP FOR AIRWAYS THAT WOULD KEEP OUR RTE WITHIN 60 NM OF AN ARPT AT ALL TIMES, WHEN (ON HIGH FREQ) ICELAND RADIO RELAYED A NEW CLRNC FROM REYKJAVIK OAC THAT READ: FROM 6538N 060W...67N 050W...66N 040W...65N 030W...63N 020W...60N 010W...STN MAINTAIN 350 MACH .80. WE READ BACK THE CLRNC TO ICELAND RADIO AND ADVISED THEM THAT WE WERE NON ETOPS TODAY AND WOULD NEED TO CHK WITH CHICAGO DISPATCH PRIOR TO ACCEPTING THE CLRNC FOR LEGALITY. I LOADED THE NEW RTE INTO RTE 2 AND NOTICED IT WAS FAIRLY CLOSE TO THE ORIGINAL ROUTING BUT COULD NOT ASCERTAIN ITS LEGALITY FOR A NON ETOPS OP. WE TRIED TO SEND THIS ROUTING VIA ACARS TO DISPATCH BUT RECEIVED NO COM. WE THEN ASKED ICELAND FOR A PHONE PATCH TO CHICAGO DISPATCH AND GAVE HIM THE NUMBER. THE OTHER FO WAS TRYING TO GET THROUGH WHEN ICELAND CAME BACK AND SAID WE MUST PROCEED BY THE NEW ROUTING. WE TOLD HIM AGAIN THAT WE WERE NON ETOPS AND THEY BEGAN ASKING US ABOUT NAV CAPABILITY. WE CONFIRMED COMPLETELY OPERATIONAL NAV CAPABILITY BUT DISPATCHED NON ETOPS FOR MAINT CONSIDERATIONS. WE TOLD THEM WE WOULD PROCEED TO 67N 050W BUT STILL NEEDED TO VERIFY ITS LEGALITY, AFTER THEY INSISTED WE PROCEED. CHICAGO DISPATCH FINALLY WAS RECEIVED BY PHONE PATCH WHO ADVISED US THAT WE COULD NOT RERTE AND MUST STAY ON ORIGINAL ROUTING. WE ADVISED ICELAND RADIO THAT WE MUST RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL ROUTING. THEY HAD TO RELAY TO REYKJAVIK OAC AND WOULD CALL US BACK. WE PRODDED THEM AGAIN TO RECEIVE CLRNC ON THE ORIGINAL ROUTING AS WE WERE UNABLE THE RERTE AND THEY AGAIN SAID THEY WOULD CHK. PRIOR TO SF WE ADVISED THEM WE MUST PROCEED BY THE ORIGINAL ROUTING AND THEY AGAIN ASKED US ABOUT NAV CAPABILITIES, AND THEY WOULD CHK. AT SF WE ADVISED THEM WE WERE PROCEEDING BY THE ORIGINAL ROUTING AND TURNED. 95 MINS LATER WE RECEIVED ACARS MESSAGE THAT SAID THAT THE REROUTING WAS VALID AND THAT HE (THE DISPATCHER) WAS SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE. ICELAND HAD ADVISED US THAT A RPT WOULD BE FILED AS 067N 050W WAS WITHIN 50 MINS LEGALITY. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 237816: WE WERE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THIS CLRNC DUE TO ACFT BEING DISPATCHED NON ETOPS DUE TO AN ERRATIC AUTO PRESSURIZATION CTLR. WE HAD GREAT DIFFICULTY COMMUNICATING OUR NEEDS TO REYKJAVIK OAC THROUGH ICELAND RADIO HIGH FREQ. WHEN WE INFORMED THEM WE WERE UNABLE ETOPS WE WERE REPEATEDLY QUESTIONED ABOUT OUR NAV CAPABILITY. IT WAS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE WITH BOTH THE ICELAND HIGH FREQ OPERATOR AND DISPATCH THROUGH THE HIGH FREQ PATCH. IN ADDITION THE LANGUAGE BARRIER PLUS A RADIO OPERATOR RELAYING CTL INSTRUCTIONS BTWN AN ACFT AND CTLR CREATES A CHAOTIC CONDITION WHEN ATTEMPTING TO COMMUNICATE ALL BUT ROUTINE INFO. ACFT IS TCASII EQUIPPED AND NO TFC WAS OBSERVED AT ALL DURING THIS INCIDENT.

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.