Narrative:

Through 12000' in climb I received ZJX clearance climb to FL230. Resume normal speed, cleared direct cecil (nzc). I tuned 114.1 from the high altitude chart. A red navigation off flag was present. I flew a magnetic heading of 005 degrees awaiting a navigation lock on. Meanwhile, center amends the clearance to turn left heading 300 degrees, level FL190. We were becoming a possible conflict with traffic to our right side. No evasive vectors or actions required. Center asked for our cecil radial. Obviously, we did not know at this time and we advised center that we were not receiving cecil. Center asked what frequency we had tuned. We responded with 114.1. Center advised to tune 108.2, much to my dismay. First of all, there was not a long period of time between given direct cecil and then being vectored off course while awaiting a navigation lock on. More importantly is the real confusion of the proper nzc frequency. The high chart has (114.1) navy cecil. As discovered later, the low chart has 108.2 cecil. Nzc is both navy cecil and cecil, but with different frequencys. My filed altitude was FL330. Therefore, I used the high altitude chart for frequency reference which obviously was very misleading. I recommend that the navy cecil frequencys tac 88 (114.1) on the high chart be deleted, forcing use of the low chart with the proper frequency. I am sure that I am not the first to make this particular mistake since ZJX knew both frequencys 114.1 and 108.2 right off the top of his head. A phone call back to ZJX upon landing was appropriate and constructive. ZJX indicated that the situation was not a problem. However, I hope that no other pilot has to end up in the same situation which could and should be eliminated by deleting a misleading frequency. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: the reporter was not entirely clear what the chart depiction meant. He discussed the situation with an ATC supervisor who also was not clear what the problem was, but stated this occurred frequently. He stated that the problem would be corrected and in fact the high altitude chart has been revised.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE FLT CREW ERRONEOUSLY TUNED THE FREQ THAT ENABLES CIVILIAN TUNING OF TACAN OR DME FAC ONLY. THIS FREQ DOES NOT PRESENT VOR AZIMUTH INFORMATION.

Narrative: THROUGH 12000' IN CLB I RECEIVED ZJX CLRNC CLB TO FL230. RESUME NORMAL SPD, CLRED DIRECT CECIL (NZC). I TUNED 114.1 FROM THE HIGH ALT CHART. A RED NAV OFF FLAG WAS PRESENT. I FLEW A MAGNETIC HDG OF 005 DEGS AWAITING A NAV LOCK ON. MEANWHILE, CENTER AMENDS THE CLRNC TO TURN LEFT HDG 300 DEGS, LEVEL FL190. WE WERE BECOMING A POSSIBLE CONFLICT WITH TFC TO OUR RIGHT SIDE. NO EVASIVE VECTORS OR ACTIONS REQUIRED. CENTER ASKED FOR OUR CECIL RADIAL. OBVIOUSLY, WE DID NOT KNOW AT THIS TIME AND WE ADVISED CENTER THAT WE WERE NOT RECEIVING CECIL. CENTER ASKED WHAT FREQ WE HAD TUNED. WE RESPONDED WITH 114.1. CENTER ADVISED TO TUNE 108.2, MUCH TO MY DISMAY. FIRST OF ALL, THERE WAS NOT A LONG PERIOD OF TIME BTWN GIVEN DIRECT CECIL AND THEN BEING VECTORED OFF COURSE WHILE AWAITING A NAV LOCK ON. MORE IMPORTANTLY IS THE REAL CONFUSION OF THE PROPER NZC FREQ. THE HIGH CHART HAS (114.1) NAVY CECIL. AS DISCOVERED LATER, THE LOW CHART HAS 108.2 CECIL. NZC IS BOTH NAVY CECIL AND CECIL, BUT WITH DIFFERENT FREQS. MY FILED ALT WAS FL330. THEREFORE, I USED THE HIGH ALT CHART FOR FREQ REF WHICH OBVIOUSLY WAS VERY MISLEADING. I RECOMMEND THAT THE NAVY CECIL FREQS TAC 88 (114.1) ON THE HIGH CHART BE DELETED, FORCING USE OF THE LOW CHART WITH THE PROPER FREQ. I AM SURE THAT I AM NOT THE FIRST TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR MISTAKE SINCE ZJX KNEW BOTH FREQS 114.1 AND 108.2 RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF HIS HEAD. A PHONE CALL BACK TO ZJX UPON LNDG WAS APPROPRIATE AND CONSTRUCTIVE. ZJX INDICATED THAT THE SITUATION WAS NOT A PROB. HOWEVER, I HOPE THAT NO OTHER PLT HAS TO END UP IN THE SAME SITUATION WHICH COULD AND SHOULD BE ELIMINATED BY DELETING A MISLEADING FREQ. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: THE RPTR WAS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR WHAT THE CHART DEPICTION MEANT. HE DISCUSSED THE SITUATION WITH AN ATC SUPVR WHO ALSO WAS NOT CLEAR WHAT THE PROB WAS, BUT STATED THIS OCCURRED FREQUENTLY. HE STATED THAT THE PROB WOULD BE CORRECTED AND IN FACT THE HIGH ALT CHART HAS BEEN REVISED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.