Narrative:

Our flight was delayed 5 1/2 hours due to mechanical -- change of equipment and WX. WX in miami area had los of rain showers/thunderstorms that evening. We were cleared for takeoff on runway 9R with a heading of 060 degrees. We requested to avoid WX. Contacted mia departure frequency 119.45 and advised of our heading 060 degrees. Controller cleared us to 7000 ft or 8000 ft. Shortly after, controller asked if we could turn east. We initially said no, then quickly told him we could go east for a few mi if a turn given before WX. Controller then cleared us to 310 degree heading followed shortly by 270 degree heading. I directed first officer to verify he wanted us on 270 degree heading. Controller answered we would be vectored for WX. We were given a second departure frequency. I do not recall. This controller gave us heading 240 degrees, 230 degrees, 210 degrees. We started to question the headings given and were switched to a third departure frequency 120.5 and given a heading of 180 degrees. Our route of flight was to the northeast. We again questioned the heading and plan. The controller stated the same as the previous one, 'I was told to take you south 100 mi around WX.' we strongly requested a left turn on course for fuel conservation for our flight across the atlantic. We stated that we could see the WX out the window and on radar and that we could see a clear path to the north along our planned route. At that moment, controller answered something close to these words, 'do what you want and tell me what that is.' we told him we would turn north. Controller ok'ed and we proceeded on course to the north paralleling our route, west of the WX. Mia en route controller could see we would not proceed to louiz intersection and reclred us on AR7. We paralleled this new route until able to proceed to jains intersection. This was a 'normal' deviation -- one close to our flight plan and certainly in the right general direction of our flight plan. Of extreme importance to note: once we proceeded to the north, at no time did we have trouble staying clear of the WX, and at no time did any controller indicate a problem with traffic. I saw 1 aircraft on TCASII -- period. Analyzing the comments and tone of voice of mia departure controller on frequency 119.45, the headings given further and further south in the opposite direction of our route, the fact that the next 2 controllers stated they were told to take us south 100 mi, all 3 pilots felt something had gone very wrong and unusual with mia departure controller on frequency 119.45. It is my opinion that this controller acted at the very least with a bad attitude and a total lack of communication of his plan. Or at worst -- and most likely -- he acted willfully and vindictively to somehow teach us a lesson for requesting something different than what he wanted. Either way, this controller acted in a non professional manner with a total disregard for what was best for safety. To a certain degree, he went as far as to jeopardize the safety of our flight. Here are some of the reasons: a course to the nne from point of takeoff would have put us close to our flight plan route -- at least in the right direction for our flight across the atlantic to cdg. We eventually prevailed and proceeded that way freely without any problem. Instead, the 100 mi south deviation he decided to try to impose on us would have burned precious fuel -- this after we had an extended delay on the ground. His initial vectors brought us back in the mia airport approach area with multiple traffic instead of our flight clearing the area to the north -- vectors west and southwest brought us back to the WX west of mia. Not least -- this controller by his actions unexpected because so unusual -- bewildered the crew and brought upon the crew a high level of stress which is not conducive to safety. This crew at no time was engaged in trying to 'bother' or go against the will of this controller. The crew at all times was trying to conduct a safe flight and willing to comply with reasonable demands from ATC. For the above reason, I request a full investigation of facts.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B767 FLC QUESTION ZMA CTLR VECTORING TECHNIQUE TO KEEP FLC AWAY FROM WX E OF ARPT.

Narrative: OUR FLT WAS DELAYED 5 1/2 HRS DUE TO MECHANICAL -- CHANGE OF EQUIP AND WX. WX IN MIAMI AREA HAD LOS OF RAIN SHOWERS/TSTMS THAT EVENING. WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 9R WITH A HDG OF 060 DEGS. WE REQUESTED TO AVOID WX. CONTACTED MIA DEP FREQ 119.45 AND ADVISED OF OUR HDG 060 DEGS. CTLR CLRED US TO 7000 FT OR 8000 FT. SHORTLY AFTER, CTLR ASKED IF WE COULD TURN E. WE INITIALLY SAID NO, THEN QUICKLY TOLD HIM WE COULD GO E FOR A FEW MI IF A TURN GIVEN BEFORE WX. CTLR THEN CLRED US TO 310 DEG HDG FOLLOWED SHORTLY BY 270 DEG HDG. I DIRECTED FO TO VERIFY HE WANTED US ON 270 DEG HDG. CTLR ANSWERED WE WOULD BE VECTORED FOR WX. WE WERE GIVEN A SECOND DEP FREQ. I DO NOT RECALL. THIS CTLR GAVE US HDG 240 DEGS, 230 DEGS, 210 DEGS. WE STARTED TO QUESTION THE HDGS GIVEN AND WERE SWITCHED TO A THIRD DEP FREQ 120.5 AND GIVEN A HDG OF 180 DEGS. OUR RTE OF FLT WAS TO THE NE. WE AGAIN QUESTIONED THE HDG AND PLAN. THE CTLR STATED THE SAME AS THE PREVIOUS ONE, 'I WAS TOLD TO TAKE YOU S 100 MI AROUND WX.' WE STRONGLY REQUESTED A L TURN ON COURSE FOR FUEL CONSERVATION FOR OUR FLT ACROSS THE ATLANTIC. WE STATED THAT WE COULD SEE THE WX OUT THE WINDOW AND ON RADAR AND THAT WE COULD SEE A CLR PATH TO THE N ALONG OUR PLANNED RTE. AT THAT MOMENT, CTLR ANSWERED SOMETHING CLOSE TO THESE WORDS, 'DO WHAT YOU WANT AND TELL ME WHAT THAT IS.' WE TOLD HIM WE WOULD TURN N. CTLR OK'ED AND WE PROCEEDED ON COURSE TO THE N PARALLELING OUR RTE, W OF THE WX. MIA ENRTE CTLR COULD SEE WE WOULD NOT PROCEED TO LOUIZ INTXN AND RECLRED US ON AR7. WE PARALLELED THIS NEW RTE UNTIL ABLE TO PROCEED TO JAINS INTXN. THIS WAS A 'NORMAL' DEV -- ONE CLOSE TO OUR FLT PLAN AND CERTAINLY IN THE RIGHT GENERAL DIRECTION OF OUR FLT PLAN. OF EXTREME IMPORTANCE TO NOTE: ONCE WE PROCEEDED TO THE N, AT NO TIME DID WE HAVE TROUBLE STAYING CLR OF THE WX, AND AT NO TIME DID ANY CTLR INDICATE A PROB WITH TFC. I SAW 1 ACFT ON TCASII -- PERIOD. ANALYZING THE COMMENTS AND TONE OF VOICE OF MIA DEP CTLR ON FREQ 119.45, THE HDGS GIVEN FURTHER AND FURTHER S IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF OUR RTE, THE FACT THAT THE NEXT 2 CTLRS STATED THEY WERE TOLD TO TAKE US S 100 MI, ALL 3 PLTS FELT SOMETHING HAD GONE VERY WRONG AND UNUSUAL WITH MIA DEP CTLR ON FREQ 119.45. IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS CTLR ACTED AT THE VERY LEAST WITH A BAD ATTITUDE AND A TOTAL LACK OF COM OF HIS PLAN. OR AT WORST -- AND MOST LIKELY -- HE ACTED WILLFULLY AND VINDICTIVELY TO SOMEHOW TEACH US A LESSON FOR REQUESTING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HE WANTED. EITHER WAY, THIS CTLR ACTED IN A NON PROFESSIONAL MANNER WITH A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR WHAT WAS BEST FOR SAFETY. TO A CERTAIN DEG, HE WENT AS FAR AS TO JEOPARDIZE THE SAFETY OF OUR FLT. HERE ARE SOME OF THE REASONS: A COURSE TO THE NNE FROM POINT OF TKOF WOULD HAVE PUT US CLOSE TO OUR FLT PLAN RTE -- AT LEAST IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR OUR FLT ACROSS THE ATLANTIC TO CDG. WE EVENTUALLY PREVAILED AND PROCEEDED THAT WAY FREELY WITHOUT ANY PROB. INSTEAD, THE 100 MI S DEV HE DECIDED TO TRY TO IMPOSE ON US WOULD HAVE BURNED PRECIOUS FUEL -- THIS AFTER WE HAD AN EXTENDED DELAY ON THE GND. HIS INITIAL VECTORS BROUGHT US BACK IN THE MIA ARPT APCH AREA WITH MULTIPLE TFC INSTEAD OF OUR FLT CLRING THE AREA TO THE N -- VECTORS W AND SW BROUGHT US BACK TO THE WX W OF MIA. NOT LEAST -- THIS CTLR BY HIS ACTIONS UNEXPECTED BECAUSE SO UNUSUAL -- BEWILDERED THE CREW AND BROUGHT UPON THE CREW A HIGH LEVEL OF STRESS WHICH IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO SAFETY. THIS CREW AT NO TIME WAS ENGAGED IN TRYING TO 'BOTHER' OR GO AGAINST THE WILL OF THIS CTLR. THE CREW AT ALL TIMES WAS TRYING TO CONDUCT A SAFE FLT AND WILLING TO COMPLY WITH REASONABLE DEMANDS FROM ATC. FOR THE ABOVE REASON, I REQUEST A FULL INVESTIGATION OF FACTS.

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.