Narrative:

Potential for clearance deviation due to performance and attitude of clearance delivery operation: clearance delivered rapidly, crew unfamiliar with airport, attempted readback, controller repeated clearance quickly again. No reply on readback so we queried controller, who again, rapidly read clearance and although we again failed on the readback, the controller did not acknowledge. Later, before taxi, I attempted to clarify the clearance. The controller was again rude and terse with his replies. In addition, I had a question about a fix named in the clearance, and the controller reply was quite terse. Runway incursions and clearance deviations occur often. I believe because of these types of events. Over and over, pilots are told, 'if in doubt, query the controller.' yet when our queries are met with unprofessional sarcasm and contempt, how often will we attempt to clarify before taking the 'we'll figure it out on the fly' attitude. The stage is now set for disaster. In this case, as in others I've experienced, the problem is not a mistake or omission, it rests in the chosen attitude of one or more of the players. There is no good reason to not correct this problem. All the FAA memos charts, mail outs, etc, are useless if we let foul attitudes go unchallenged any longer.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL60 PIC QUESTIONS DCA TWR CTLR'S ATTITUDE AND RESPONSE TO REQUESTED VERIFICATION AND READBACK OF IFR DEP CLRNC.

Narrative: POTENTIAL FOR CLRNC DEVIATION DUE TO PERFORMANCE AND ATTITUDE OF CLRNC DELIVERY OPERATION: CLRNC DELIVERED RAPIDLY, CREW UNFAMILIAR WITH ARPT, ATTEMPTED READBACK, CTLR REPEATED CLRNC QUICKLY AGAIN. NO REPLY ON READBACK SO WE QUERIED CTLR, WHO AGAIN, RAPIDLY READ CLRNC AND ALTHOUGH WE AGAIN FAILED ON THE READBACK, THE CTLR DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE. LATER, BEFORE TAXI, I ATTEMPTED TO CLARIFY THE CLRNC. THE CTLR WAS AGAIN RUDE AND TERSE WITH HIS REPLIES. IN ADDITION, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT A FIX NAMED IN THE CLRNC, AND THE CTLR REPLY WAS QUITE TERSE. RWY INCURSIONS AND CLRNC DEVIATIONS OCCUR OFTEN. I BELIEVE BECAUSE OF THESE TYPES OF EVENTS. OVER AND OVER, PLTS ARE TOLD, 'IF IN DOUBT, QUERY THE CTLR.' YET WHEN OUR QUERIES ARE MET WITH UNPROFESSIONAL SARCASM AND CONTEMPT, HOW OFTEN WILL WE ATTEMPT TO CLARIFY BEFORE TAKING THE 'WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT ON THE FLY' ATTITUDE. THE STAGE IS NOW SET FOR DISASTER. IN THIS CASE, AS IN OTHERS I'VE EXPERIENCED, THE PROB IS NOT A MISTAKE OR OMISSION, IT RESTS IN THE CHOSEN ATTITUDE OF ONE OR MORE OF THE PLAYERS. THERE IS NO GOOD REASON TO NOT CORRECT THIS PROB. ALL THE FAA MEMOS CHARTS, MAIL OUTS, ETC, ARE USELESS IF WE LET FOUL ATTITUDES GO UNCHALLENGED ANY LONGER.

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.