Narrative:

At approximately XA40 we were taxiing on taxiway south from the hangar to preposition at the gate. Ground told us to contact tower approaching runway 32 for crossing. Approaching intersecting taxiway right, the copilot called tower and said we were approaching runway 32 for crossing to preposition to gate. Tower advised us to hold short of runway 32. We acknowledged. A few seconds later we both thought we heard the tower tell us to cross runway 32 (saab, aircraft X). The copilot acknowledged. I checked that runway was clear and started across. About 1/2 way across, the tower came back and said to hold short of runway 32. I was already moving across and continued. Then tower said, 'continue across runway 32 and call the tower as soon as possible on the phone.' I called the tower. The controller said she did not clear us across the runway, she cleared aircraft Y across runway 32 at taxiway left. There was other traffic in the vicinity of runway 32 at the time (aircraft Y, a G-1, us. Aircraft X, and a metropolitan). While continuing our taxi to the gate, the tower even called us 'metropolitan X, continue taxi,' which we caught and verified. The obvious problem of course is similar sounding call signs. The fix seems to me to be use of complete call signs by both pilots and controllers in such sits. Supplemental information from acn 637045: I read back the clearance and we held short of runway 32. A min went by and tower gave taxi clearance, both the captain and myself heard 'aircraft X.' I read back the clearance and we proceeded to cross runway 32. It wasn't until we were 1/2 way across the runway before tower responded 'that was for aircraft Y, not aircraft X.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RWY INCURSION RWY 32 CITED BY LCL CTLR FOR A TAXIING SF340 WHEN HEARING THEIR CALL SIGN. CREW ALLEGED THAT CTLR ISSUED WRONG SIMILAR CALL SIGN AT ANC.

Narrative: AT APPROX XA40 WE WERE TAXIING ON TXWY S FROM THE HANGAR TO PREPOSITION AT THE GATE. GND TOLD US TO CONTACT TWR APCHING RWY 32 FOR XING. APCHING INTERSECTING TXWY R, THE COPLT CALLED TWR AND SAID WE WERE APCHING RWY 32 FOR XING TO PREPOSITION TO GATE. TWR ADVISED US TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 32. WE ACKNOWLEDGED. A FEW SECONDS LATER WE BOTH THOUGHT WE HEARD THE TWR TELL US TO CROSS RWY 32 (SAAB, ACFT X). THE COPLT ACKNOWLEDGED. I CHKED THAT RWY WAS CLR AND STARTED ACROSS. ABOUT 1/2 WAY ACROSS, THE TWR CAME BACK AND SAID TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 32. I WAS ALREADY MOVING ACROSS AND CONTINUED. THEN TWR SAID, 'CONTINUE ACROSS RWY 32 AND CALL THE TWR ASAP ON THE PHONE.' I CALLED THE TWR. THE CTLR SAID SHE DID NOT CLR US ACROSS THE RWY, SHE CLRED ACFT Y ACROSS RWY 32 AT TXWY L. THERE WAS OTHER TFC IN THE VICINITY OF RWY 32 AT THE TIME (ACFT Y, A G-1, US. ACFT X, AND A METRO). WHILE CONTINUING OUR TAXI TO THE GATE, THE TWR EVEN CALLED US 'METRO X, CONTINUE TAXI,' WHICH WE CAUGHT AND VERIFIED. THE OBVIOUS PROB OF COURSE IS SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS. THE FIX SEEMS TO ME TO BE USE OF COMPLETE CALL SIGNS BY BOTH PLTS AND CTLRS IN SUCH SITS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 637045: I READ BACK THE CLRNC AND WE HELD SHORT OF RWY 32. A MIN WENT BY AND TWR GAVE TAXI CLRNC, BOTH THE CAPT AND MYSELF HEARD 'ACFT X.' I READ BACK THE CLRNC AND WE PROCEEDED TO CROSS RWY 32. IT WASN'T UNTIL WE WERE 1/2 WAY ACROSS THE RWY BEFORE TWR RESPONDED 'THAT WAS FOR ACFT Y, NOT ACFT X.'

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.