A CRJ700 CREW FAILED TO FLY THE NON RNAV DFW GARLAND TWO SID. THE TRACK DEV REQUIRED AN ATC VECTOR. AN AGITATED CAPT AND JUNIOR FO WERE FACTORS.

Narrative

DUE TO MEL 30-06; WHICH REQUIRES THE FLT TO BE OPERATED IN NON-ICING CONDITIONS; WE WERE FILED AT 11000 FT AND RECEIVED THE GARLAND TWO DEP. WE VERIFIED THE ROUTING; INCLUDING THE DEP; BUT NO MENTION WAS MADE THAT THE GARLAND TWO IS A NON-RNAV DEP. ON DEP; AT 400 FT AGL; I CALLED FOR NAV; AND AT 600 FT AUTOPLT ON. CAPT COMPLIED. WE BEGAN TO ENTER A L TURN IMMEDIATELY TOWARDS THE TTT VOR. CAPT SPOKE UP RIGHT AWAY AND SAID HE FORGOT TO MENTION THIS WAS A NON RNAV PROC; AND TO TURN BACK TO 174 DEGS IMMEDIATELY (RWY HDG). I DISCONNECTED THE AUTOPLT; HAND-FLEW BACK TO RWY HDG. ADDITIONALLY; ATC WAS APPARENTLY ALSO CONFUSED ABOUT OUR CLRNC. AFTER THE ABOVE EVENT; THEY GAVE US VECTORS AND A CLB UP TO 17000 FT -- OUR FILED ALT WAS ONLY 11000 FT. WE ACCEPTED BECAUSE SKIES WERE CLR WITH NO CHANCE OF ICING PER OUR MEL. AS WE WERE PASSING THROUGH 12000 FT WE CONTACTED THE NEXT CTLR WHO TOLD US TO MAINTAIN 11000 FT. CAPT EXPLAINED OUR MEL TO HIM AND THAT WE WERE ALREADY CLRED TO 17000 FT AND COULD ACCEPT HIGHER IF NEEDED. ONE CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS LAW OF EXERCISE -- LEAVING DFW; WE ALWAYS SELECT NAV AT 400 FT AGL; AND NEITHER THE CAPT NOR I WERE PREPARED TO SELECT HDG INSTEAD; WE DID WHAT WE ALWAYS DO. THE SAME GOES FOR ATC GIVING US 17000 FT EVEN THOUGH WE WERE FILED AT 11000 FT. THEY KNOW WE ALWAYS GO HIGHER; SO NEVER WOULD HAVE THOUGHT WE WERE FILED AT 11000 FT. I ALSO FEEL THAT THE CAPT WAS EXTREMELY DISTR AND AGITATED. IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO OUR FLT; HE WAS IN THE CHIEF PLT'S OFFICE IN A HEATED DISCUSSION ABOUT AN EVENT THAT HAPPENED THE PREVIOUS WK. HE VENTED ABOUT THE MEETING THE WHOLE WAY TO THE RWY; AND I HAD TO INTERRUPT HIM TO TALK TO GND CTL. LOOKING AT MY MFD ON TAXI I THOUGHT THE IMMEDIATE L TURN TO TTT LOOKED ODD AND WANTED TO CONFIRM THE DEP; BUT CAPT WAS RANTING ABOUT HIS MEETING AND I NEVER COULD GET A WORD IN. AFTER THE ABOVE EVENT OCCURRED; HE ADMITTED THAT 1) HE SHOULD HAVE BRIEFED ME THAT THIS WAS A RADAR VECTOR DEP; AND THAT 2) THE ADDED DISTR AND PRESSURE OF A STRESSFUL MEETING IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING OUR FLT CAUSED HIM TO NOT BRIEF THE PROC CORRECTLY. I KNOW I FOR ONE WILL PAY SPECIAL ATTN TO ANY DEP OR STAR THAT IS UNFAMILIAR TO ME. EVEN THOUGH CAPT BRIEFED THE DEP; I SHOULD HAVE LOOKED AT IT MYSELF AND I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT IT WAS RADAR VECTORS. IF A STERILE COCKPIT WOULD HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED DURING TAXI; I WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO QUERY CAPT ABOUT THE DEP SINCE IT LOOKED STRANGE TO ME ON THE MFD; AND HE WOULD HAVE TOLD ME IT WAS RADAR VECTORS AND I NEVER WOULD HAVE CALLED FOR NAV INSTEAD OF HDG. FINALLY; A SIMPLE 'IMSAFE' CHKLIST WOULD HAVE HELPED CAPT REALIZE HIS MEETING IN THE CHIEF PLT'S OFFICE WAS AFFECTING HIS JOB PERFORMANCE (STRESS). IT WAS A CHAIN OF BROKEN LINKS THAT LEAD TO THE EVENT. FIX ANY ONE OF THESE LINKS; AND THERE WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN AN EVENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 804666: ATC REASSIGNED US HDG AND ALT AND WE COMPLIED WITH THEIR INSTRUCTIONS. ATC CONTACTED US SHORTLY AFTER OUR TURN; AND WE WERE GIVEN A PHONE NUMBER TO CONTACT THEM. AN UNFAMILIAR DEP; COMBINED WITH A LACK OF HDG INFO FROM TWR; AND A JUNIOR PLT.