FLC OF A CL65; REGIONAL JET; FAILED TO FOLLOW THEIR FLT PLAN CLRNC ROUTING RESULTING IN ATC INTERVENTION AND REDIRECTION TO GET BACK ON INTENDED RTE. THE ACFT FMS WAS PROGRAMMED IN ERROR AND THE FLC USING THIS PROGRAM HAD BEEN OFF COURSE AND HAD NOT KNOWN IT.

Date: 1997-02 · Aircraft: Challenger CL604

Anomalies: deviation-track-heading-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance|other-unspecified

Synopsis

FLC OF A CL65; REGIONAL JET; FAILED TO FOLLOW THEIR FLT PLAN CLRNC ROUTING RESULTING IN ATC INTERVENTION AND REDIRECTION TO GET BACK ON INTENDED RTE. THE ACFT FMS WAS PROGRAMMED IN ERROR AND THE FLC USING THIS PROGRAM HAD BEEN OFF COURSE AND HAD NOT KNOWN IT.

Narrative

OUR CLRNC FROM YYZ-BOS: (TORONTO 2 V252 J16 ALB AS FILED.) AFTER RECEIVING THE ABOVE CLRNC WE PROGRAMMED THE FLT MGMNT SYS (FMS) FOR THE FLT. THE COMPANY RTE WHICH WAS STORED IN THE FMS MEMORY WAS AS FOLLOWS.....(YYZ01 EHMAN HANKK ALB ALB01 GDM...). AS WE LOOKED OVER THE 2 PLANS WE NOTICED THE DISCREPANCY BTWN THE CLRNC OF V252 J16 AND THE FMS VERSION OF EHMAN...HANKK. ON THE CHARTS THERE IS NO INTXN WHERE V252 AND J16 MEET BUT THE 2 LISTED INTXNS ON THE FMS WERE WITHIN A FEW MI AND WE ASSUMED THAT THE FMS RTE WAS HOW THE COMPANY HAD CHOSEN US TO MAKE THE TRANSITION FROM V252 TO J16. FLYING ALONG BTWN EHMAN AND HANKK ZOB ASKED US IF WE SHOWED OURSELVES ON THE AIRWAY. WE REPLIED; 'YES;' AND ASKED IF THERE WAS A PROB. THE CTLR SAID HE SHOWED US TO BE 7 MI N OF J16 AND WE IMMEDIATELY KNEW THAT THE FMS RTE WAS NOT IN FACT IN CORRELATION WITH WHERE THE CTR HAD INTENDED US TO FLY. WE DID MATCH OUR CLRNC WITH THE FMS ON THE GND; BUT WE MADE THE WRONG ASSUMPTION WITH USING THE INTXNS INSTEAD OF PROGRAMMING EXACTLY WHERE V252 AND J16 MEET. I'VE NOTICED SEVERAL TIMES IN USING THE FMS THAT THE NUMBERS REPRESENTING THE RADIAL OF AN AIRWAY DO NOT EXACTLY COME UP THE SAME AS WHAT IS LISTED ON THE CHARTS; BUT IT HAS NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED BEFORE. I THINK THIS FACTORED IN WITH OUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PREPROGRAMMED COMPANY RTE. IT WAS VERY CLOSE AND IN THE PAST THAT HAS ALWAYS WORKED. WE HAVE CONTACTED THE COMPANY AND HAVE BEEN INFORMED A NOTICE WILL BE PUT ON ALL TORONTO TO BOSTON FLT RELEASES NOTIFYING CREW MEMBERS OF THIS PARTICULAR CONFUSING ISSUE. IN SPEAKING WITH SEVERAL OTHER PLTS AT THE COMPANY WHO HAVE FLOWN THE SAME RTE; SOME HAD NOTICED; SOME HAD NOT. IT'S NOT THAT WE DIDN'T CHK THE ACCURACY OF THE FMS DATA; WE JUST ASSUMED IT WAS WHAT WAS INTENDED DUE TO THE CLOSE PROX OF THE TWO. SHORTLY AFTER THE CTLR ASKED US ABOUT THIS ISSUE; HE CLRED US DIRECT TO ALBANY VOR AND SEEMED TO HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENED AND WILL BE MORE VIGILANT IN THE FUTURE AS TO CORRELATING FMS COMPANY PLANS AND OUR CLRNCS.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.