37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 615849 |
Time | |
Date | 200403 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : sfo.airport |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : zzz.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | A319 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : ground |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Experience | controller limited radar : 12 controller radar : 2 flight time total : 191 |
ASRS Report | 615849 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Company |
Primary Problem | Company |
Narrative:
Aircraft #1 called me on ground control to confirm runways in use and that his departure conflicted for different runway use. I informed the pilot that his correct clearance preferential departure was above the company requested route in minus symbols. He believed this constituted an amended clearance and therefore should not have received it electronically. I attempted to clear it up then and there, but then I remembered aircraft #2 had the exact same discussion on clearance delivery. Both aircraft were foreign air carrier X. In the following up with co-workers, it seems this is a common occurrence with air carrier X. I inquired whether this problem occurred in home country. I was told pre departure clearance/ACARS clrncs are only received in the USA. I coordinated with aircraft #1 to get a copy of the clearance and picked it up from the gate agent. It looks the same as all others I have seen on this day. This concerns me because of unexpected turns/pltdevs. Training is the only possible solution. There are many users who correctly use it.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SFO TWR CTLR EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING SOME FOREIGN ACR'S INTERP OF PDC CLRNCS.
Narrative: ACFT #1 CALLED ME ON GND CTL TO CONFIRM RWYS IN USE AND THAT HIS DEP CONFLICTED FOR DIFFERENT RWY USE. I INFORMED THE PLT THAT HIS CORRECT CLRNC PREFERENTIAL DEP WAS ABOVE THE COMPANY REQUESTED RTE IN MINUS SYMBOLS. HE BELIEVED THIS CONSTITUTED AN AMENDED CLRNC AND THEREFORE SHOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED IT ELECTRONICALLY. I ATTEMPTED TO CLR IT UP THEN AND THERE, BUT THEN I REMEMBERED ACFT #2 HAD THE EXACT SAME DISCUSSION ON CLRNC DELIVERY. BOTH ACFT WERE FOREIGN ACR X. IN THE FOLLOWING UP WITH CO-WORKERS, IT SEEMS THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE WITH ACR X. I INQUIRED WHETHER THIS PROB OCCURRED IN HOME COUNTRY. I WAS TOLD PDC/ACARS CLRNCS ARE ONLY RECEIVED IN THE USA. I COORDINATED WITH ACFT #1 TO GET A COPY OF THE CLRNC AND PICKED IT UP FROM THE GATE AGENT. IT LOOKS THE SAME AS ALL OTHERS I HAVE SEEN ON THIS DAY. THIS CONCERNS ME BECAUSE OF UNEXPECTED TURNS/PLTDEVS. TRAINING IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION. THERE ARE MANY USERS WHO CORRECTLY USE IT.
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.