Narrative:

This flight was issued an ATC clearance ewr-pit, with an ewr 3 departure. The ewr 3 was a recently revised procedure, however neither pilot had flown it before--although we both had it filed, and we consulted it before we left the gate. Both the 2 and the 3 call for an initial turn to 190 degrees (22R in use); the procedures differ as to subsequent turning point and heading. Just as we started our second turn, the controller queried us as to whether we began our turn at the 3 DME of the ilsq localizer as prescribed by the ewr 3. At that point, both pilots realized that we had unconsciously reverted to the old procedure prescribing a turn after crossing the cri 281 degree right, through force of habit. As we were established in the turn in the proper direction, the controller gave us yet another heading to fly and a climb clearance, and we resumed our departure. Factors bearing on this mistake: unfamiliarity with a new procedure and lengthy period of time between consulting it when it was issued in the clearance, and the execution of it on departure, making it easy to unthinkingly or unwittingly revert back to the old habit. Would it be appropriate for ATC to call attention to a change in an old-time procedure for the first few days following its implementation, just for a little insurance against a mistake like this being made?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG TRACK HEADING DEVIATION ON SID FROM EWR.

Narrative: THIS FLT WAS ISSUED AN ATC CLRNC EWR-PIT, WITH AN EWR 3 DEP. THE EWR 3 WAS A RECENTLY REVISED PROC, HOWEVER NEITHER PLT HAD FLOWN IT BEFORE--ALTHOUGH WE BOTH HAD IT FILED, AND WE CONSULTED IT BEFORE WE LEFT THE GATE. BOTH THE 2 AND THE 3 CALL FOR AN INITIAL TURN TO 190 DEGS (22R IN USE); THE PROCS DIFFER AS TO SUBSEQUENT TURNING POINT AND HDG. JUST AS WE STARTED OUR SECOND TURN, THE CTLR QUERIED US AS TO WHETHER WE BEGAN OUR TURN AT THE 3 DME OF THE ILSQ LOC AS PRESCRIBED BY THE EWR 3. AT THAT POINT, BOTH PLTS REALIZED THAT WE HAD UNCONSCIOUSLY REVERTED TO THE OLD PROC PRESCRIBING A TURN AFTER XING THE CRI 281 DEG R, THROUGH FORCE OF HABIT. AS WE WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE TURN IN THE PROPER DIRECTION, THE CTLR GAVE US YET ANOTHER HDG TO FLY AND A CLB CLRNC, AND WE RESUMED OUR DEP. FACTORS BEARING ON THIS MISTAKE: UNFAMILIARITY WITH A NEW PROC AND LENGTHY PERIOD OF TIME BTWN CONSULTING IT WHEN IT WAS ISSUED IN THE CLRNC, AND THE EXECUTION OF IT ON DEP, MAKING IT EASY TO UNTHINKINGLY OR UNWITTINGLY REVERT BACK TO THE OLD HABIT. WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ATC TO CALL ATTN TO A CHANGE IN AN OLD-TIME PROC FOR THE FIRST FEW DAYS FOLLOWING ITS IMPLEMENTATION, JUST FOR A LITTLE INSURANCE AGAINST A MISTAKE LIKE THIS BEING MADE?

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.