Narrative:

My clearance from charlotte clearance delivery was to the pitt-greenville airport, hugh 5 departure, gippr transition, as filed. Climb and maintain 4000 ft. Departure control frequency 124.0, with transponder code. After reporting ready for takeoff, runway 18L, taxiway a, I was cleared for takeoff with what I understood to be approximately the following terminology: left turn after takeoff, cleared for takeoff runway 18L at intersection a, remain south of runway 23. I interpreted this clearance to mean, after takeoff make left turn to an on-course heading, but insure my track remains south of runway 23. At the moment, that statement sounded inappropriate for an IFR clearance, but I just accepted it without question. After takeoff, I slowly turned the aircraft to a heading of 095 degrees, expecting to receive a vector from departure to intercept the gippr transition. Instead, the controller asked what heading I was assigned. I informed him that I was not given a specific heading and repeated my takeoff clearance. He informed me to turn to a heading of 150 degrees, which he said tower should have assigned. A few moments later, he stated that the tower controller stated he issued a heading of 150 degrees and that the hold south of runway 23 warning was to remain south of the runway 23 in setting up for takeoff. I told the controller I was confident that I was not issued a specific heading. That terminated the discussion. After reviewing the departure procedure and recalling my past experiences at charlotte, I should have received some heading clearance, whether it was maintain runway heading or a specific heading. I should have queried the local controller for a specific heading. I do not know why I didn't, but can only assume I was complacent with the departure procedure since I have made many recent departures from charlotte airport within the last 6 months. It is also possible that I may have been distraction with completing a checklist procedure when the takeoff clearance was issued and missed the heading. However, even if the controller didn't issue a heading, I should have questioned him. Corrective action: as a single pilot, review the departure procedure each departure, regardless of the frequency of use. Additionally, I believe a different use of clearance terminology may have eliminated my confusion with the remain south of runway 23 statement. Recommend controller state instead 'remain south of runway 23 for takeoff.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PA31 PLT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON A 150 DEG HDG, DEPARTING CLT BUT CLAIMS THAT HE NEVER RECEIVED IT.

Narrative: MY CLRNC FROM CHARLOTTE CLRNC DELIVERY WAS TO THE PITT-GREENVILLE ARPT, HUGH 5 DEP, GIPPR TRANSITION, AS FILED. CLB AND MAINTAIN 4000 FT. DEP CTL FREQ 124.0, WITH XPONDER CODE. AFTER RPTING READY FOR TKOF, RWY 18L, TXWY A, I WAS CLRED FOR TKOF WITH WHAT I UNDERSTOOD TO BE APPROX THE FOLLOWING TERMINOLOGY: L TURN AFTER TKOF, CLRED FOR TKOF RWY 18L AT INTXN A, REMAIN S OF RWY 23. I INTERPRETED THIS CLRNC TO MEAN, AFTER TKOF MAKE L TURN TO AN ON-COURSE HDG, BUT INSURE MY TRACK REMAINS S OF RWY 23. AT THE MOMENT, THAT STATEMENT SOUNDED INAPPROPRIATE FOR AN IFR CLRNC, BUT I JUST ACCEPTED IT WITHOUT QUESTION. AFTER TKOF, I SLOWLY TURNED THE ACFT TO A HDG OF 095 DEGS, EXPECTING TO RECEIVE A VECTOR FROM DEP TO INTERCEPT THE GIPPR TRANSITION. INSTEAD, THE CTLR ASKED WHAT HDG I WAS ASSIGNED. I INFORMED HIM THAT I WAS NOT GIVEN A SPECIFIC HDG AND REPEATED MY TKOF CLRNC. HE INFORMED ME TO TURN TO A HDG OF 150 DEGS, WHICH HE SAID TWR SHOULD HAVE ASSIGNED. A FEW MOMENTS LATER, HE STATED THAT THE TWR CTLR STATED HE ISSUED A HDG OF 150 DEGS AND THAT THE HOLD S OF RWY 23 WARNING WAS TO REMAIN S OF THE RWY 23 IN SETTING UP FOR TKOF. I TOLD THE CTLR I WAS CONFIDENT THAT I WAS NOT ISSUED A SPECIFIC HDG. THAT TERMINATED THE DISCUSSION. AFTER REVIEWING THE DEP PROC AND RECALLING MY PAST EXPERIENCES AT CHARLOTTE, I SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED SOME HDG CLRNC, WHETHER IT WAS MAINTAIN RWY HDG OR A SPECIFIC HDG. I SHOULD HAVE QUERIED THE LCL CTLR FOR A SPECIFIC HDG. I DO NOT KNOW WHY I DIDN'T, BUT CAN ONLY ASSUME I WAS COMPLACENT WITH THE DEP PROC SINCE I HAVE MADE MANY RECENT DEPS FROM CHARLOTTE ARPT WITHIN THE LAST 6 MONTHS. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT I MAY HAVE BEEN DISTR WITH COMPLETING A CHKLIST PROC WHEN THE TKOF CLRNC WAS ISSUED AND MISSED THE HDG. HOWEVER, EVEN IF THE CTLR DIDN'T ISSUE A HDG, I SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONED HIM. CORRECTIVE ACTION: AS A SINGLE PLT, REVIEW THE DEP PROC EACH DEP, REGARDLESS OF THE FREQ OF USE. ADDITIONALLY, I BELIEVE A DIFFERENT USE OF CLRNC TERMINOLOGY MAY HAVE ELIMINATED MY CONFUSION WITH THE REMAIN S OF RWY 23 STATEMENT. RECOMMEND CTLR STATE INSTEAD 'REMAIN S OF RWY 23 FOR TKOF.'

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.