Narrative:

Due to early morning departure, human factors were not at 100 percent. Even though several personal techniques were used to remind me to get en route clearance, this was still not accomplished. We departed the gate, taxied to the runway, and departed. It wasn't until just after liftoff we discovered we had not obtained our en route clearance. Neither ground control, tower, or departure control questioned us. After landing in ewr, we did contact pit tower to confirm no problems were caused. Callback conversation with pit tower procedure specialist revealed the following information: discussion with a pit tower procedure specialist disclosed that since the flight crew did not contact clearance delivery when using the pre-departure clearance flight plan method, there is no routine method of checking, or verifying that the flight has received their flight plan as ground control is not designed to verify the flight plan receipt. The FAA specialist further stated that flight plan strips are produced when the FAA ATC facility receives back the carrier acknowledgement of the flight plan from ATC which includes the transponder squawk along with any other local departure information. He also stated that first time ATC will have an indication that the aircraft is not following the designed flight plan is upon liftoff showing the wrong transponder code and subsequent headings and altitudes in error. He believes that the pre-departure clearance procedure was established to reduce the radio frequency congestion and that the carrier needs to put in place methods to assure that this incident does not happen.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FO OF ACR MLG ACFT FAILED TO OBTAIN THE PRE-DEP CLRNC FLT PLAN PRIOR TO TKOF AND OPERATED THE ENTIRE FLT RTE WITHOUT AN IFR CLRNC.

Narrative: DUE TO EARLY MORNING DEP, HUMAN FACTORS WERE NOT AT 100 PERCENT. EVEN THOUGH SEVERAL PERSONAL TECHNIQUES WERE USED TO REMIND ME TO GET ENRTE CLRNC, THIS WAS STILL NOT ACCOMPLISHED. WE DEPARTED THE GATE, TAXIED TO THE RWY, AND DEPARTED. IT WASN'T UNTIL JUST AFTER LIFTOFF WE DISCOVERED WE HAD NOT OBTAINED OUR ENRTE CLRNC. NEITHER GND CTL, TWR, OR DEP CTL QUESTIONED US. AFTER LNDG IN EWR, WE DID CONTACT PIT TWR TO CONFIRM NO PROBS WERE CAUSED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH PIT TWR PROC SPECIALIST REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: DISCUSSION WITH A PIT TWR PROC SPECIALIST DISCLOSED THAT SINCE THE FLC DID NOT CONTACT CLRNC DELIVERY WHEN USING THE PRE-DEP CLRNC FLT PLAN METHOD, THERE IS NO ROUTINE METHOD OF CHKING, OR VERIFYING THAT THE FLT HAS RECEIVED THEIR FLT PLAN AS GND CTL IS NOT DESIGNED TO VERIFY THE FLT PLAN RECEIPT. THE FAA SPECIALIST FURTHER STATED THAT FLT PLAN STRIPS ARE PRODUCED WHEN THE FAA ATC FACILITY RECEIVES BACK THE CARRIER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FLT PLAN FROM ATC WHICH INCLUDES THE XPONDER SQUAWK ALONG WITH ANY OTHER LCL DEP INFO. HE ALSO STATED THAT FIRST TIME ATC WILL HAVE AN INDICATION THAT THE ACFT IS NOT FOLLOWING THE DESIGNED FLT PLAN IS UPON LIFTOFF SHOWING THE WRONG XPONDER CODE AND SUBSEQUENT HDGS AND ALTS IN ERROR. HE BELIEVES THAT THE PRE-DEP CLRNC PROC WAS ESTABLISHED TO REDUCE THE RADIO FREQ CONGESTION AND THAT THE CARRIER NEEDS TO PUT IN PLACE METHODS TO ASSURE THAT THIS INCIDENT DOES NOT HAPPEN.

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.