Narrative:

On departure the clearance was to climb to 5000 ft on a 180 degree heading. After takeoff when we were switched to departure they told us to turn to 090 degrees. Then after about 15 seconds they told us to turn to 270 degrees. Then a few seconds later to turn to 080 degrees and expedite. Then they said to turn to cowby which was not on our flight plan. I thought that cowby must be one of the other fixes near shead which was our next waypoint so I turned in that direction and tried to load the cowby waypoint. We had to turn because we were still at 5000 ft and flying towards a 5090 ft mountain and we were only a mi or so away. I then realized that I did not know the identifier for cowby and told the controller that I needed the identify. He then had us turn to 180 degrees and wanted to know what our destination was. It seemed that he had us confused with another aircraft and then wanted to know why we had turned to 020 degrees (towards shead). We then received a climb and vectors to shead. I probably should not have turned towards shead when I did not know exactly where cowby was but we also should not get 5 different vectors within the first 120 seconds of flight while at an altitude that does not provide adequate terrain clearance. The last heading was taking us dangerously close to terrain. Our TCAS system did not show any other aircraft within 10 mi of our position and there were no other aircraft departing the airport or arriving so I am not aware of the reason for the multiple directional changes at a critical point in flight. Because we were in VFR conditions and there were no other aircraft in the vicinity there was no real danger but in IFR conditions this could have been deadly. ATC should not issue multiple vectors to low flying aircraft that are in critical flight operations (takeoff/landing) period. Further; they should not vector aircraft in mountainous terrain at low altitude when we could have quickly climbed to a more appropriate altitude. I think this was the result of the controller confusing our flight with another but will probably never know. In the future I will be quicker to deny a clearance to an unknown waypoint when at low altitudes.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA46 PILOT REPORTS CONFUSING VECTORS AFTER DEPARTING HND THEN DIRECT TO A POINT NOT ON ROUTE OR DIRECTION OF FLIGHT. ATC QUESTIONS TURN IN WRONG DIRECTION AND LEARNS OF CONFUSION WITH ANOTHER ACFT.

Narrative: ON DEP THE CLRNC WAS TO CLB TO 5000 FT ON A 180 DEG HDG. AFTER TKOF WHEN WE WERE SWITCHED TO DEP THEY TOLD US TO TURN TO 090 DEGS. THEN AFTER ABOUT 15 SECONDS THEY TOLD US TO TURN TO 270 DEGS. THEN A FEW SECONDS LATER TO TURN TO 080 DEGS AND EXPEDITE. THEN THEY SAID TO TURN TO COWBY WHICH WAS NOT ON OUR FLT PLAN. I THOUGHT THAT COWBY MUST BE ONE OF THE OTHER FIXES NEAR SHEAD WHICH WAS OUR NEXT WAYPOINT SO I TURNED IN THAT DIRECTION AND TRIED TO LOAD THE COWBY WAYPOINT. WE HAD TO TURN BECAUSE WE WERE STILL AT 5000 FT AND FLYING TOWARDS A 5090 FT MOUNTAIN AND WE WERE ONLY A MI OR SO AWAY. I THEN REALIZED THAT I DID NOT KNOW THE IDENTIFIER FOR COWBY AND TOLD THE CTLR THAT I NEEDED THE IDENT. HE THEN HAD US TURN TO 180 DEGS AND WANTED TO KNOW WHAT OUR DEST WAS. IT SEEMED THAT HE HAD US CONFUSED WITH ANOTHER ACFT AND THEN WANTED TO KNOW WHY WE HAD TURNED TO 020 DEGS (TOWARDS SHEAD). WE THEN RECEIVED A CLB AND VECTORS TO SHEAD. I PROBABLY SHOULD NOT HAVE TURNED TOWARDS SHEAD WHEN I DID NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHERE COWBY WAS BUT WE ALSO SHOULD NOT GET 5 DIFFERENT VECTORS WITHIN THE FIRST 120 SECONDS OF FLT WHILE AT AN ALT THAT DOES NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE TERRAIN CLRNC. THE LAST HDG WAS TAKING US DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO TERRAIN. OUR TCAS SYS DID NOT SHOW ANY OTHER ACFT WITHIN 10 MI OF OUR POS AND THERE WERE NO OTHER ACFT DEPARTING THE ARPT OR ARRIVING SO I AM NOT AWARE OF THE REASON FOR THE MULTIPLE DIRECTIONAL CHANGES AT A CRITICAL POINT IN FLT. BECAUSE WE WERE IN VFR CONDITIONS AND THERE WERE NO OTHER ACFT IN THE VICINITY THERE WAS NO REAL DANGER BUT IN IFR CONDITIONS THIS COULD HAVE BEEN DEADLY. ATC SHOULD NOT ISSUE MULTIPLE VECTORS TO LOW FLYING ACFT THAT ARE IN CRITICAL FLT OPS (TKOF/LNDG) PERIOD. FURTHER; THEY SHOULD NOT VECTOR ACFT IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN AT LOW ALT WHEN WE COULD HAVE QUICKLY CLBED TO A MORE APPROPRIATE ALT. I THINK THIS WAS THE RESULT OF THE CTLR CONFUSING OUR FLT WITH ANOTHER BUT WILL PROBABLY NEVER KNOW. IN THE FUTURE I WILL BE QUICKER TO DENY A CLRNC TO AN UNKNOWN WAYPOINT WHEN AT LOW ALTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.