B757; OFF DFW; BEGAN TRACKING DIRECT TO OKM RATHER THAN VIA THE TEXOMA 1 SID.

Narrative

INITIAL ATC CLRNC FROM DFW WAS VIA TEXOMA 1 TO OKM. DURING PREFLT CHK OF FMS RTE; I ADDED THE ARR FOR ORD BUT WAS DISTRACTED BEFORE LOADING THE DEP. WHILE STEPPING THROUGH THE RTE TO VERIFY; I FAILED TO NOTICE THE ABSENCE OF THE TEX 1. PRIOR TO OCT/XX/96 THERE HAD BEEN NO NBOUND SIDS IN THE DATABASE SO I WAS PERHAPS CONDITIONED TO SEEING RWY DIRECT TO THE FIRST FIX IN THE FMS. HOWEVER; DURING THE BEFORE START CHKLIST THE CAPT AND I METHODICALLY SET UP RAW DATA FOR THE DEP AND DISCUSSED. SOMEHOW I FAILED TO CONNECT THIS MENTALLY TO THE FMS. AFTER TKOF WE WERE GIVEN A HDG TO INTERCEPT THE TEX 1. THE CAPT (PF) ARMED LNAV AND THE COURSE WAS INTERCEPTED. SHORTLY THEREAFTER ATC QUESTIONED OUR COURSE. WE BOTH SWITCHED TO RAW DATA AND THE CAPT CORRECTED WITH HDG SELECT. IT WAS AT THIS TIME THAT WE REALIZED THE ABSENCE OF THE TEX 1 IN THE FMS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE RWY DIRECT TO OKM SHOWED A COURSE OF 012 DEGS WHICH WAS COINCIDENTALLY THE SAME AS THE OUTBOUND COURSE OF 012 DEGS FROM FUZ. IN ADDITION A CASUAL LOOK AT THE CHART DEPICTION OF THE OKM TRANSITION LOOKS LIKE A DIRECT COURSE FROM FUZ TO OKM WHILE IN REALITY THERE IS AN OBVIOUS DOGLOG. LESSON LEARNED: ALWAYS COMPARE RTE IN FMS TO FLT PLAN COPY.