Narrative:

While approaching ewr on jan/xx/97, on the williamport 1 arrival at about XX20Z, we had been given numerous off course delay vectors. Then new york approach cleared us direct sweet and contact 128.55. Upon checking in with the new controller I received the following clearance, descend to 6000 ft then slow to 210 KTS and turn 210 degrees. I replied in a clear, precise and measured cadence, to slow to 210 KTS upon reaching 6000 ft and turn to 210 degree heading. This heading took us away from ewr and I questioned the controller about how long the downwind was planned. He replied in a rapid fire manner something which wasn't totally clear to me. He then asked what our heading was and I said 210 degrees assigned, after which he shot back in a terse manner to maintain 120 degrees immediately. My first officer an I both heard the 210 degree heading and were not convinced that the controller originally issued a 120 degree heading as he claimed in a subsequent message. After 2 more clrncs, this controller showed inordinate impatience when I didn't reply to a vector in which he transposed our flight number call sign. I've flown to all areas of the united states and am familiar with the high traffic areas. Let me suggest that controllers will accomplish more by speaking a bit slower, issuing groups of numbers with an occasional pause, and carefully listening for the correct readback. The turn error could have been prevented had he heard my readback.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG ACFT BEING VECTORED BY APCH CTLR WAS GIVEN HEADING ASSIGNMENT IN WHICH THE NUMBERS WERE INVERTED. FLC BOTH HEARD THE HEADING AND READ BACK, BUT THE CTLR DIDN'T HEAR THE READBACK AND THEN QUESTIONED THEIR HEADING AND CORRECTED.

Narrative: WHILE APCHING EWR ON JAN/XX/97, ON THE WILLIAMPORT 1 ARR AT ABOUT XX20Z, WE HAD BEEN GIVEN NUMEROUS OFF COURSE DELAY VECTORS. THEN NEW YORK APCH CLRED US DIRECT SWEET AND CONTACT 128.55. UPON CHKING IN WITH THE NEW CTLR I RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING CLRNC, DSND TO 6000 FT THEN SLOW TO 210 KTS AND TURN 210 DEGS. I REPLIED IN A CLR, PRECISE AND MEASURED CADENCE, TO SLOW TO 210 KTS UPON REACHING 6000 FT AND TURN TO 210 DEG HDG. THIS HEADING TOOK US AWAY FROM EWR AND I QUESTIONED THE CTLR ABOUT HOW LONG THE DOWNWIND WAS PLANNED. HE REPLIED IN A RAPID FIRE MANNER SOMETHING WHICH WASN'T TOTALLY CLR TO ME. HE THEN ASKED WHAT OUR HEADING WAS AND I SAID 210 DEGS ASSIGNED, AFTER WHICH HE SHOT BACK IN A TERSE MANNER TO MAINTAIN 120 DEGS IMMEDIATELY. MY FO AN I BOTH HEARD THE 210 DEG HDG AND WERE NOT CONVINCED THAT THE CTLR ORIGINALLY ISSUED A 120 DEG HDG AS HE CLAIMED IN A SUBSEQUENT MESSAGE. AFTER 2 MORE CLRNCS, THIS CTLR SHOWED INORDINATE IMPATIENCE WHEN I DIDN'T REPLY TO A VECTOR IN WHICH HE TRANSPOSED OUR FLT NUMBER CALL SIGN. I'VE FLOWN TO ALL AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES AND AM FAMILIAR WITH THE HIGH TFC AREAS. LET ME SUGGEST THAT CTLRS WILL ACCOMPLISH MORE BY SPEAKING A BIT SLOWER, ISSUING GROUPS OF NUMBERS WITH AN OCCASIONAL PAUSE, AND CAREFULLY LISTENING FOR THE CORRECT READBACK. THE TURN ERROR COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED HAD HE HEARD MY READBACK.

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.