AN EMB145 FLC FLY THE INCORRECT SID AND ROUTING TO OVERHEAD CQY; TX. ATC ISSUES A NEW ROUTING TO CONFORM WITH THEIR AMENDED CLRNC THAT WAS ON THEIR ORIGINAL PDC AT IAH; TX.
Synopsis
AN EMB145 FLC FLY THE INCORRECT SID AND ROUTING TO OVERHEAD CQY; TX. ATC ISSUES A NEW ROUTING TO CONFORM WITH THEIR AMENDED CLRNC THAT WAS ON THEIR ORIGINAL PDC AT IAH; TX.
Narrative
WE WERE OPERATING AS FLT FROM IAH TO OMA. I WAS PAIRED WITH A NEW FO; AND IT WAS THE LAST TURN OF A 2-DAY TRIP. OUR ACFT WAS PARKED AT A TERMINAL SOME DISTANCE FROM OUR OPS FACILITY. THIS NECESSITATED ME HAVING OUR PDC SENT OVER TO OUR GATE. THIS WAS THE FO'S SECOND TRIP OFF IOE; AND AS TO BE EXPECTED THINGS WERE GOING A BIT SLOW. IN ORDER TO MAKE AN ON-TIME PUSHBACK; I WAS ASSISTING THE FO WITH SOME OF HIS COCKPIT DUTIES. APPROX 3 MINS TO PUSH TIME; THE FLT ATTENDANT GAVE US THE PAX COUNT; THE FO ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT WT AND BAL PROCS; AND THE GATE AGENT HANDED ME THE PDC. ALL THIS HAPPENED AT ONCE; AND INSTEAD OF CAREFULLY REVIEWING OUR PDC; I JUST GLANCED AT IT AND NOTED THAT RTE PRINTED THERE MATCHED OUR COMPANY FILED FLT PLAN. UNFORTUNATELY; DUE TO THE HIGH WORKLOAD AND DESIRE TO BE ON TIME; I FAILED TO NOTICE THAT THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT PRINTED JUST ABOVE OUR RTE; WHICH WAS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OUR COMPANY FILED RTE. AFTER TKOF; WE WERE CLRED DIRECT TO LOA VOR AND THEN CQY VOR. THIS DIFFERED SLIGHTLY FROM OUR COMPANY FLT PLAN; BUT BECAUSE OF SEVERAL ATC INSTRUCTIONS AT ONCE; AND THE FO'S UNFAMILIARITY WITH THE ACFT; WE WERE BOTH HAVING TO MONITOR THE ACFT'S CONFIGN VERY CLOSELY. ALTHOUGH AT THIS TIME I HAD A FEELING SOMETHING WAS NOT RIGHT; I GOT DISTR WITH PNF DUTIES AND NEVER REALLY ADDRESSED THE FACT THAT SOMETHING WAS NOT GOING AS PLANNED. AS WE APCHED THE CQY VOR; ZFW INQUIRED IF WE WERE GOING DIRECT TO BYP. I REPLIED THAT NO; OUR CLRNC SHOWED US GOING FROM CQY TO CVE THEN VIA THE COMPANY FLT PLAN. HE THEN ISSUED A NEW HDG AND A NEW CLRNC WHICH WE COPIED AND COMPLIED WITH. ABOUT 1 HR LATER; ON FREQ WITH ZKC; WE WERE ADVISED TO CALL ZFW WHEN WE LANDED BECAUSE WE HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN A PLTDEV. MY FO AND I DISCUSSED WHAT WE COULD HAVE DONE TO HAVE CAUSED THIS. AT THIS POINT I FINALLY RE-EXAMINED THE PDC AND SAW THAT AN AMENDMENT TO OUR ORIGINALLY FILED COMPANY FLT PLAN HAD BEEN PRINTED ON THE PDC. WHEN AN AMENDMENT IS CONTAINED ON A PDC IT IS PRINTED INSIDE 2 DASHES AND IS PLACED JUST ABOVE THE COMPANY RTE. I BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE OF OUR HIGH COCKPIT WORKLOAD AND TIME CONSTRAINTS JUST BEFORE PUSHBACK; I FAILED TO ADEQUATELY REVIEW THE PDC FOR ANY AMENDMENTS. I BELIEVE THAT MY DESIRE TO BE ON TIME; THE FO'S LACK OF FAMILIARITY WITH THE ACFT AND COMPANY PROCS; AND THE HIGH WORKLOAD JUST PRIOR TO PUSHBACK ALL CONTRIBUTED TO THIS ERROR. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE OUR PDC'S USUALLY MATCH OUR COMPANY FILED FLT PLAN; THAT A BIT OF COMPLACENCY ALSO EXISTED. I MUST ALSO STATE THAT THE FO WAS DOING A GOOD JOB AND WAS BY NO MEANS INCOMPETENT. HE JUST DEMANDED A BIT MORE OF MY ATTN WHICH DETRACTED A BIT FROM MY PERFORMANCE AS A CAPT. I FEEL THAT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF WE WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED THE BUILDING CHAIN OF EVENTS. 1) A NEW CREW MEMBER; 2) TIME COMPRESSION; 3) HIGH WORKLOAD; 4) COMPLACENCY. FINALLY; THE LACK OF LISTENING TO THE FEELING THAT SOMETHING WASN'T RIGHT. AS CREW MEMBERS WE MUST ALL INCREASE OUR VIGILANCE WHEN ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS EXIST. MOREOVER; IF SOMETHING JUST DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT; IT PROBABLY ISN'T; AND SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO EACH OTHER'S ATTN AND DISCUSSED AND A COURSE OF ACTION DETERMINED.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.