Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Aircraft X departed OKC enroute to [destination]. We were cleared for the MUDDE1 departure to MUDDE; then direct to RBUKL. Sometime between MUDDE and RBUKL; we were instructed to depart FAWNT heading 220. FAWNT was not along our route; so believed that PHAUP was the fix that the controller stated. We read back 'depart PHAUP heading 220'; and the controller accepted our readback. Sometime past FAWNT; and prior to PHAUP; the controller asked us why we weren't flying the 220 heading that he instructed. We stated that we hadn't arrived at PHAUP yet. He stated that we were 25 miles (approx) past 'FAWNT'; and instructed us to turn to a heading of 240. We complied and turned to the heading of 240. We asked if the spelling of the fix was P.H.A.U.P. he stated 'no; I don't have time to discuss it'. Afterward; we referenced the arrival chart and realized that he must have been referring to the FAWNT intersection; and he must have not known that we were cleared from MUDDE to RBUKL; bypassing FAWNT. No other events occurred; and the flight arrived safely and on time.Controller was not aware that we were cleared from MUDDE directly to RBUKL; therefore bypassing FAWNT. The name of the fix 'FAWNT' sounds similar to the fix 'PHAUP'. The clearance was read back; referencing the 'PHAUP' intersection; without correction from the controller. Alleviate similar sounding fixes on a departure; arrival; and approach procedure. Or; until then; controllers spell out the name of the fix; to alleviate confusion or error.


Second narrative: On arrival we were cleared direct to RBUKL and shortly after that we were given after PHAUP head 220. While still on the arrival the controller came back and said that we missed our turn to the heading but we were nowhere near PHAUP yet. He said he told us FAWNT not PHAUP. It was very hard to even understand it after he called us back. Nothing came of it and no traffic was near us. He said no problem at all but we still wanted to make sure it was known. It was just a radio communication misunderstanding because the fixes both sound so similar on the radio. We continued and landed without incident.Just a radio miscommunication on 2 different fixes that sound very similar on the radio.Try to change similar sounding fixes on the same arrival.


Synopsis: An aircraft was instructed to depart a fix on a heading. The aircraft acknowledged the clearance but read back a different similar sounding fix. The Controller did not catch the read back error. The aircraft did not turn to the heading the Controller wanted due to the communication confusion.