Narrative:

All flts into the NAS from non integrated foreign countries must be manually coordinated. Normally, a 'proposed flight' is entered into the NAS, and prints at the appropriate sector. As early as possible, the foreign facility manually passes the necessary information via landline communications at the sector. For proposal flts in the system, this includes only coordination fix time, altitude, and beacon code. It is only necessary to pass all flight plan information if no proposal flight has been entered into the system. Havana cta/fir controller called with an estimate for xxxabc. I had a proposal flight at the sector matching that call sign, so I copied only the fix time, altitude, and beacon code. 15 mins later, havana controller called back to say 'reference, xxxabd the correct call sign is xyzabd everything else is the same.' flight numbers sometimes get typed into the NAS wrong, usually off by 1 digit. XXX and xyz are 2 different scheduled air carrier operators from 2 different countries. I am unaware of any route sharing agreement between them. Havana controllers sometimes pass the wrong flight plan estimate. I had no proposal flight plan for xyzabd. I said, 'confirm xxxabc, scel to kmia, is now xyzabd?' the havana controller said 'no, xyzabd departed segu and is landing kjfk.' I told the havana controller to retrieve all necessary information and pass me a full flight plan estimate, which I then entered into the system at the sector. Had I not been naturally suspicious, this error would not have been caught until the aircraft entered united states airspace and was given a clearance towards a mia arrival gate a mere 57 mi away. The sector was busy at the time, and such an error would have increased the controller workload significantly. If the aircraft went NORDO and deviated from the fpr we expected, it would have undoubtedly been scrambled on. A visual inspection by an interceptor aircraft observing the wrong paint scheme on an air carrier aircraft is a potential disaster. We work with many foreign country ATC providers at ZMA. They all need to do a better job of passing accurate information in a timely manner (see another ASRS report filed by same reporter on same date). Such errors are commonplace.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZMA CTLR QUESTIONS MUCH ABOUT A FLT PLAN PROPOSAL, REALIZING THAT THE WRONG FOREIGN ACR MAY HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR JURISDICTION XFER. ZMA CTLR ALLEGES INCORRECT FLT PLAN PROPOSAL XFERS ARE A RECURRENT PROB WITH FOREIGN ATC FACILITIES.

Narrative: ALL FLTS INTO THE NAS FROM NON INTEGRATED FOREIGN COUNTRIES MUST BE MANUALLY COORDINATED. NORMALLY, A 'PROPOSED FLT' IS ENTERED INTO THE NAS, AND PRINTS AT THE APPROPRIATE SECTOR. AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE, THE FOREIGN FACILITY MANUALLY PASSES THE NECESSARY INFO VIA LANDLINE COMS AT THE SECTOR. FOR PROPOSAL FLTS IN THE SYS, THIS INCLUDES ONLY COORD FIX TIME, ALT, AND BEACON CODE. IT IS ONLY NECESSARY TO PASS ALL FLT PLAN INFO IF NO PROPOSAL FLT HAS BEEN ENTERED INTO THE SYS. HAVANA CTA/FIR CTLR CALLED WITH AN ESTIMATE FOR XXXABC. I HAD A PROPOSAL FLT AT THE SECTOR MATCHING THAT CALL SIGN, SO I COPIED ONLY THE FIX TIME, ALT, AND BEACON CODE. 15 MINS LATER, HAVANA CTLR CALLED BACK TO SAY 'REF, XXXABD THE CORRECT CALL SIGN IS XYZABD EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME.' FLT NUMBERS SOMETIMES GET TYPED INTO THE NAS WRONG, USUALLY OFF BY 1 DIGIT. XXX AND XYZ ARE 2 DIFFERENT SCHEDULED ACR OPERATORS FROM 2 DIFFERENT COUNTRIES. I AM UNAWARE OF ANY RTE SHARING AGREEMENT BTWN THEM. HAVANA CTLRS SOMETIMES PASS THE WRONG FLT PLAN ESTIMATE. I HAD NO PROPOSAL FLT PLAN FOR XYZABD. I SAID, 'CONFIRM XXXABC, SCEL TO KMIA, IS NOW XYZABD?' THE HAVANA CTLR SAID 'NO, XYZABD DEPARTED SEGU AND IS LNDG KJFK.' I TOLD THE HAVANA CTLR TO RETRIEVE ALL NECESSARY INFO AND PASS ME A FULL FLT PLAN ESTIMATE, WHICH I THEN ENTERED INTO THE SYS AT THE SECTOR. HAD I NOT BEEN NATURALLY SUSPICIOUS, THIS ERROR WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CAUGHT UNTIL THE ACFT ENTERED UNITED STATES AIRSPACE AND WAS GIVEN A CLRNC TOWARDS A MIA ARR GATE A MERE 57 MI AWAY. THE SECTOR WAS BUSY AT THE TIME, AND SUCH AN ERROR WOULD HAVE INCREASED THE CTLR WORKLOAD SIGNIFICANTLY. IF THE ACFT WENT NORDO AND DEVIATED FROM THE FPR WE EXPECTED, IT WOULD HAVE UNDOUBTEDLY BEEN SCRAMBLED ON. A VISUAL INSPECTION BY AN INTERCEPTOR ACFT OBSERVING THE WRONG PAINT SCHEME ON AN ACR ACFT IS A POTENTIAL DISASTER. WE WORK WITH MANY FOREIGN COUNTRY ATC PROVIDERS AT ZMA. THEY ALL NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF PASSING ACCURATE INFO IN A TIMELY MANNER (SEE ANOTHER ASRS RPT FILED BY SAME RPTR ON SAME DATE). SUCH ERRORS ARE COMMONPLACE.

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.