A GENERAL AVIATION PLT DEP HONOLULU MISINTERPRETS VFR DEP PROC RESULTING IN CONFUSION FOR ATC AND HIMSELF. SUGGESTIONS ARE MADE FOR CHANGES IN THE PROC WORDING TO PREVENT A SIMILAR MISUNDERSTANDING BY OTHERS.

Narrative

I DEPARTED HONOLULU INT'L ON A VFR DEP RTE. BECAUSE OF AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE IN THE DEP PROC AND PERHAPS MY OWN RELATIVELY NEW USE OF DP'S; I TURNED TO AN INCORRECT HEADING IMMEDIATELY AFTER TKOF. COMPOUNDING MISTAKE WAS AN UNUSUAL FREQ CHANGE GIVEN TO ME IN FLT AND ATC'S (TWR AND DEP) LACK OF BEING ABLE TO LOCATE ME EVEN THOUGH I WAS DIRECTLY OVER THE FIELD IN CLR SIGHT OF THE TWR. I FLEW OVER THE FINAL APCH PATH FOR INCOMING TFC BEFORE ATC LOCATED ME. WHILE I ACKNOWLEDGE I FLEW AN INCORRECT HEADING; I THINK I WOULD NOT HAVE ENCROACHED UPON PROTECTED AIRSPACE IF ATC HAD TRACKED ME PROPERLY. ATC SHOULD HAVE NOTICED MY COURSE DEVIATION MUCH SOONER; NOTIFIED ME OF THE ERROR; AND GIVEN ME VECTORS TO CORRECT THE PROB. IF THIS HAD HAPPENED CORRECTLY; I WOULD NOT HAVE FLOWN SO FAR TOWARD PROTECTED AIRSPACE. INCLUDED HERE IS A COPY OF EVENTS I WROTE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. THE CRUX OF THE PROB WAS THIS: I MISINTERPRETED A DESCRIPTION TO 'TURN TO A HEADING OF 180 DEGS' FOR 'TURN 180 DEGS.' WHEN ATC ASKS AN ACFT TO TURN 360 DEGS THEN MEAN TURN THE PLANE IN A CIRCLE 360 DEGS AROUND AND RESUME THE PREVIOUS HEADING. WHEN I READ THE DEP PROCEDURE; IT DID NOT SEEM FARFETCHED TO ALSO TURN HALF THAT; OR 180 DEGS. ADDING TO MY MISCONCEPTION OF THE DEP PROC WAS THAT THE REST OF THE PROC CAN BE READ TO COINCIDE WITH ANOTHER DEP PROC TAKING OFF FROM THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. SO; IT MADE PERFECT SENSE AT THE TIME TO TURN 180 DEGS AND FLY THE OTHER DP. I CAN OFFER SOME MINOR BUT IMPORTANT CHANGES TO THE DEP PROC TO MAKE IT LESS AMBIGUOUS. IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY; I THINK THESE CHANGES ARE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. NOT KNOWING WHAT I DO NOW FROM THIS EXPERIENCE; I COULD EASILY DO THE SAME THING AGAIN; WHICH MEANS ANOTHER PLT MIGHT AS WELL. LET'S FIX THIS BEFORE AN ACCIDENT DOES HAPPEN. UPON REVIEW OF THE KONA WIND DEP PROCS AS OUTLINED IN THE PUB; 'HAWAII ARPTS AND FLYING SAFETY GUIDE' 2000-2001 FIRST EDITION BY STATE OF HAWAII DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION; ARPTS DIVISION. I REALIZED I HAD MISINTERPRETED THE DEP PROC FOR KONA 3. IT STATES: 'AFTER DEP; TURN L HEADING 180 DEGS FOR RADAR VECTORS EASTBOUND. EXPECT TO BE VECTORED 5 MILES OR MORE S OF DIAMOND HEAD TO AVOID RWY 26L LOA FINAL APCH COURSE. MAINTAIN 1500 FT WHILE IN CLASS B AIRSPACE. WHEN I READ THE KONA 3 DEP PROC; I READ IT AS;'... TURN TO A L HEADING; 180 DEGS...;' MEANING TURN THE PLANE IN A L TURN UNTIL IT IS HEADING 180 DEGS OPPOSITE THE INITIAL DEP DIRECTION. THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THE KONA WINDS DEPS WERE IN EFFECT SINCE I STARTED FLYING AT THIS ARPT. THIS IS HOW I INTERPRETED THE KONA 3 WHEN I READ IT: 'AFTER DEP; TURN L HEADING 180 DEGS (SO; TURN L; A 'ONE-EIGHTY' INSTEAD OF A 'THREE-SIXTY') FOR RADAR VECTORS EBND. (SO; AFTER TURNING 180 DEGS; I WILL BE HEADING ROUGHLY E; WHICH MAKES SENSE; AND WILL EXPECT VECTORS. MY ACTUAL HEADING WILL BE 040; NE; PROBABLY TO KEEP ME N OF THE LDA FOR 26L. MAKES SENSE. SOUNDS JUST LIKE A SHORELINE 4.) EXPECT TO BE VECTORED 5 MILES OR MORE S OF DIAMOND HEAD TO AVOID RWY 26L LDA FINAL APCH COURSE. (SO AFTER STAYING N OF THE LDA; THEY WILL VECTOR ME TO THE SE; KEEPING ME E OF THE LDA COURSE. THEY WILL VECTOR ME S OF DIAMOND HEAD JUST LIKE A SHORELINE 4 DEP. MAKES SENSE.) MAINTAIN 1500 FT WHILE IN CLASS B AIRSPACE. (SO; I WILL HAVE 1500 FT OF VERTICAL SEPARATION FROM APCHING ACFT ON FINAL COMING FROM THE E OR SE. AGAIN; MAKES SENSE. SOUNDS JUST LIKE A SHORELINE 4.) THE TWO MISTAKES I MADE; SEMANTIC AND CONCEPTUAL; CAN BOTH BE ADDRESSED WITH ONLY A SLIGHT CHANGE IN THE KONA 3 DEP PROC. I PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING: ADD 3 WORDS AND CHANGE THE HEADING 1 DEG EITHER WAY. IF IT READ LIKE THIS; 'AFTER DEP; TURN L TO A HEADING OF 179 DEGS (OR 181 DEGS)...;' I THINK OTHER PLTS LIKE ME (WITH LIMITED LOCAL KNOWLEDGE AND NEW TO THE ARPT) WOULD BE MUCH LESS LIKELY TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE I DID. I THINK THIS SIT COULD HAPPEN AGAIN IF ACTION IS NOT TAKEN TO CLARIFY THE WORDING IN THE KONA 3 DEPARTURE. THIS WAS NOT A MISTAKE FROM IGNORANCE OR NEGLIGENCE. IT WAS A SEMANTIC AND CONCEPTUAL ERROR BASED ON A REASONABLE MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE DEP PROC; AS OUTLINED BY ATC AND THE FAA. (THE HONOLULU FLT STANDARDS DISTRICT OFFICE ASSISTED IN PREPARING THE HAWAII ARPTS GUIDE I WAS USING.) I THINK THE SAME MISTAKE COULD EASILY BE MADE BY OTHER PLTS; SO I SINCERELY HOPE THE KONA 3 DEP PROC WILL BE CLARIFIED.