An ARTCC controller apparently assigned an air carrier MD80 super 80 flight crew to FL290 versus FL280. There was no conflict and the flight crew accepted FL310, the correct altitude for direction of flight.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	355590
Time
Date	199612
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : tlh
State Reference	FL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 28000 msl bound upper : 29000
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zjx tracon : bhm
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-80 Super 80
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude cruise other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
ASRS Report	355590
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
ASRS Report	355585
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Entering the high altitude sector, we were assigned FL290. During leveloff at FL290, controller asked our assigned altitude. Replying FL290, he informed us that he was not sure if he gave us that altitude, but no problem, would we like FL310 as he needed us at the correct altitude for direction of flight. We accepted clearance to FL310, climbed and leveled off without further comment. On further consideration of the situation, the thought occurred to me that perhaps I had misunderstood the assigned flight level or had set the wrong flight level in the window. Discussed event with first officer, who was certain that we had been cleared to FL290 and that the flight level was properly set and acknowledged in accordance with SOP. Contacted center again to confirm that no traffic occurred and was informed, once again, that there was absolutely no problem. The fact exists, however, that no matter who made the mistake, I should not have accepted the altitude assignment without question as we were filed at FL280.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ARTCC CTLR APPARENTLY ASSIGNED AN ACR MD80 SUPER 80 FLC TO FL290 VERSUS FL280. THERE WAS NO CONFLICT AND THE FLC ACCEPTED FL310, THE CORRECT ALT FOR DIRECTION OF FLT.

Narrative: ENTERING THE HIGH ALT SECTOR, WE WERE ASSIGNED FL290. DURING LEVELOFF AT FL290, CTLR ASKED OUR ASSIGNED ALT. REPLYING FL290, HE INFORMED US THAT HE WAS NOT SURE IF HE GAVE US THAT ALT, BUT NO PROB, WOULD WE LIKE FL310 AS HE NEEDED US AT THE CORRECT ALT FOR DIRECTION OF FLT. WE ACCEPTED CLRNC TO FL310, CLBED AND LEVELED OFF WITHOUT FURTHER COMMENT. ON FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE SIT, THE THOUGHT OCCURRED TO ME THAT PERHAPS I HAD MISUNDERSTOOD THE ASSIGNED FLT LEVEL OR HAD SET THE WRONG FLT LEVEL IN THE WINDOW. DISCUSSED EVENT WITH FO, WHO WAS CERTAIN THAT WE HAD BEEN CLRED TO FL290 AND THAT THE FLT LEVEL WAS PROPERLY SET AND ACKNOWLEDGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOP. CONTACTED CTR AGAIN TO CONFIRM THAT NO TFC OCCURRED AND WAS INFORMED, ONCE AGAIN, THAT THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO PROB. THE FACT EXISTS, HOWEVER, THAT NO MATTER WHO MADE THE MISTAKE, I SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE ALT ASSIGNMENT WITHOUT QUESTION AS WE WERE FILED AT FL280.

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.