Narrative:

We arrived at the airplane in charlotte and accepted the aircraft from a terminating crew. As the first officer, I copied down ATIS and called clearance control for our departure clearance. The ATIS stated to only read back transponder code and ask any relevant questions (or something to that effect). I read back the transponder code only because I felt I had no questions and understood the clearance. After departure, the controller asked if we were flying a certain departure. I stated we were not, and said we were cleared on the 'hornet one departure, naley transition,' by clearance control on the ground. Controller said it was no problem and cleared us for the hornet one departure and we left the area with no problems. I don't know if I was correct or not. I could have written down the wrong departure, not thinking anything of it, and therefore I would not question it during my readback to clearance. That's why I believe we should all be encouraged to read back the clearance and not just transponder code. Yes, it would cause more radio chatter, but not by very much. Many departures have the same 'number' or the same transitions and it is not difficult to mishear or misunderstand a clearance, especially when you are not familiar with a certain airport. Oftentimes things are busy, there is a lot of noise, and interruptions that can lead to confusion. By reading back the clearance it helps eliminate this possibility. I know there are some other airports that use this procedure such as bos. Another way to prevent this is by technology that allows you to print a copy or have an electronic copy in the cockpit such as ACARS.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL65 FLT CREW AFTER BEING ISSUED A DEP CLRNC AND FLYING THE PUBLISHED DEP IS QUESTIONED BY THE CTLR IF THEY ARE ON THE CORRECT DEP.

Narrative: WE ARRIVED AT THE AIRPLANE IN CHARLOTTE AND ACCEPTED THE ACFT FROM A TERMINATING CREW. AS THE FO, I COPIED DOWN ATIS AND CALLED CLRNC CTL FOR OUR DEP CLRNC. THE ATIS STATED TO ONLY READ BACK XPONDER CODE AND ASK ANY RELEVANT QUESTIONS (OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT). I READ BACK THE XPONDER CODE ONLY BECAUSE I FELT I HAD NO QUESTIONS AND UNDERSTOOD THE CLRNC. AFTER DEP, THE CTLR ASKED IF WE WERE FLYING A CERTAIN DEP. I STATED WE WERE NOT, AND SAID WE WERE CLRED ON THE 'HORNET ONE DEP, NALEY TRANSITION,' BY CLRNC CTL ON THE GND. CTLR SAID IT WAS NO PROB AND CLRED US FOR THE HORNET ONE DEP AND WE LEFT THE AREA WITH NO PROBS. I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS CORRECT OR NOT. I COULD HAVE WRITTEN DOWN THE WRONG DEP, NOT THINKING ANYTHING OF IT, AND THEREFORE I WOULD NOT QUESTION IT DURING MY READBACK TO CLRNC. THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ALL BE ENCOURAGED TO READ BACK THE CLRNC AND NOT JUST XPONDER CODE. YES, IT WOULD CAUSE MORE RADIO CHATTER, BUT NOT BY VERY MUCH. MANY DEPS HAVE THE SAME 'NUMBER' OR THE SAME TRANSITIONS AND IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO MISHEAR OR MISUNDERSTAND A CLRNC, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH A CERTAIN ARPT. OFTENTIMES THINGS ARE BUSY, THERE IS A LOT OF NOISE, AND INTERRUPTIONS THAT CAN LEAD TO CONFUSION. BY READING BACK THE CLRNC IT HELPS ELIMINATE THIS POSSIBILITY. I KNOW THERE ARE SOME OTHER ARPTS THAT USE THIS PROC SUCH AS BOS. ANOTHER WAY TO PREVENT THIS IS BY TECHNOLOGY THAT ALLOWS YOU TO PRINT A COPY OR HAVE AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN THE COCKPIT SUCH AS ACARS.

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.