Narrative:

I received a clearance from elp and loaded the FMS for a departure on the ATKNN4 departure; slnnk transition. I selected runway 26L pursuant to the ATIS. We were told to expect 8R during pushback for arriving traffic. I specifically asked the ground controller if this runway change would affect our departure procedure (as it has many times in the past). To which the controller responded in the negative. Before beginning our taxi; we were giving another runway change; we were told to expect runway 4 for departure. The ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors on departure; which is fitting as runway 4 is not served by the ATKNN4 RNAV departure procedure. I selected runway 4 in the FMS. Significantly; selecting this runway for departure clears the ATKNN4 slnnk waypoints from the FMS because there is no established route from runway 4. I did not find this significant; since the ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors. We received a takeoff clearance with an initial heading assignment of runway heading. We contacted departure and were assigned a northerly heading (I do not recall what the exact heading was). The next lateral clearance we receive was to proceed direct to the jebsu waypoint. This is one of the points in the FMS that was cleared by selecting runway 4 for departure. I tried telling my captain that the point wouldn't be there before he accepted and read back the clearance; but I couldn't in time. After he finished reading back the clearance; I suggested he request a radar vector toward the fix; as jebsu was not readily retrievable in the FMS. He thought it more appropriate to attempt rebuilding the departure from an appropriate departure runway and then navigating to the assigned waypoint. I again suggested we ask for a radar vector. Shortly after that and in the middle of reloading the FMS; the departure controller; assigned us a 270 heading and advised us we were 'getting close to restricted airspace.' presumably she was referring to R-5107A. She then gave us a 230 heading. Once we reloaded the departure; we navigated directly to jebsu and resumed our own navigation.I believe the most significant cause of our course deviation was the improper assigning of the departure procedure. The ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors. In light of this and that runway 4 isn't served by this departure procedure; I considered the ATKNN4 cancelled. Furthermore; there is a departure procedure; the JCOXX1; that follows a near identical path to the same transition (slnnk). Secondary causes of the event include my subsequent accepting of the aforementioned clearance. Whenever receiving a clearance with radar vectors; controllers historically provide a first fix they would expect you to navigate to (e.g. 'Radar vectors jebsu and then as filed'). The absence of an initial point in retrospect should have served as a red flag that deserved some attention and clarification. Also; after being given the clearance; we may have become too wrapped up in automation. Yes we received a seemingly faulty clearance. Yes I read it back and accepted it. But we compounded the problem further by not communicating with ATC properly and not making the turn we accepted a clearance to make. The ATKNN4 departure does not serve runway 4. If we takeoff from runway 4; (or any runway not served by a SID) we can't be expected to navigate to fixes on or fly that procedure. Whether or not it's legal; it's simply impossible for us to set it up in our FMS and fly it. I think communication between the airline community and the controllers in elp on this score would be highly beneficial to both parties. I also take much of the blame. I have seen this happen in elp before. I should have been more critical when accepting the clearance on the ground and I should have more strongly impressed upon my captain my perceived for a radar vector.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ-200 First Officer reported a track deviation resulted when they were cleared to a fix that was not loaded into the FMC.

Narrative: I received a clearance from ELP and loaded the FMS for a departure on the ATKNN4 departure; SLNNK transition. I selected runway 26L pursuant to the ATIS. We were told to expect 8R during pushback for arriving traffic. I specifically asked the ground controller if this runway change would affect our departure procedure (as it has many times in the past). To which the controller responded in the negative. Before beginning our taxi; we were giving another runway change; we were told to expect runway 4 for departure. The ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors on departure; which is fitting as runway 4 is not served by the ATKNN4 RNAV departure procedure. I selected runway 4 in the FMS. Significantly; selecting this runway for departure clears the ATKNN4 SLNNK waypoints from the FMS because there is no established route from runway 4. I did not find this significant; since the ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors. We received a takeoff clearance with an initial heading assignment of runway heading. We contacted departure and were assigned a northerly heading (I do not recall what the exact heading was). The next lateral clearance we receive was to proceed direct to the JEBSU waypoint. This is one of the points in the FMS that was cleared by selecting runway 4 for departure. I tried telling my Captain that the point wouldn't be there before he accepted and read back the clearance; but I couldn't in time. After he finished reading back the clearance; I suggested he request a radar vector toward the fix; as JEBSU was not readily retrievable in the FMS. He thought it more appropriate to attempt rebuilding the departure from an appropriate departure runway and then navigating to the assigned waypoint. I again suggested we ask for a radar vector. Shortly after that and in the middle of reloading the FMS; the departure controller; assigned us a 270 heading and advised us we were 'getting close to restricted airspace.' Presumably she was referring to R-5107A. She then gave us a 230 heading. Once we reloaded the departure; we navigated directly to JEBSU and resumed our own navigation.I believe the most significant cause of our course deviation was the improper assigning of the departure procedure. The ground controller advised us we would receive radar vectors. In light of this and that runway 4 isn't served by this departure procedure; I considered the ATKNN4 cancelled. Furthermore; there is a departure procedure; the JCOXX1; that follows a near identical path to the same transition (SLNNK). Secondary causes of the event include my subsequent accepting of the aforementioned clearance. Whenever receiving a clearance with radar vectors; controllers historically provide a first fix they would expect you to navigate to (e.g. 'radar vectors JEBSU and then as filed'). The absence of an initial point in retrospect should have served as a red flag that deserved some attention and clarification. Also; after being given the clearance; we may have become too wrapped up in automation. Yes we received a seemingly faulty clearance. Yes I read it back and accepted it. But we compounded the problem further by not communicating with ATC properly and not making the turn we accepted a clearance to make. The ATKNN4 departure does not serve runway 4. If we takeoff from runway 4; (or any runway not served by a SID) we can't be expected to navigate to fixes on or fly that procedure. Whether or not it's legal; it's simply impossible for us to set it up in our FMS and fly it. I think communication between the airline community and the controllers in ELP on this score would be highly beneficial to both parties. I also take much of the blame. I have seen this happen in ELP before. I should have been more critical when accepting the clearance on the ground and I should have more strongly impressed upon my Captain my perceived for a radar vector.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.