Narrative:

When I filed my flight plan, I forgot to mention 'no SID' in the remarks, so dtw clearance delivery read off my clearance and the amendments to my flight plan, and specified the mingo 7 departure. Since this was my first IFR departure from a large and busy airport, it didn't register until I looked at the charts and realized that I couldn't find the intersection that he had named. After several futile attempts to get a clarification from clearance deliver, I finally contacted dtw ground control and explained my dilemma, and he amended my clearance to: 'radar vectors to intercept the dxo 006 right.' I departed runway 3R, and was given an immediate left turn by the tower to 320 degrees, which took me across the top of the airport. I was barely outside the airport boundary when I was switched over to dtw approach, who gave me a new heading of 340 degrees. I was still climbing (having been cleared to 5000') and was just starting to enter the clouds when I began to intercept the dxo 006 degree right. Since my clearance explicitly stated that I was to intercept this radial, I turned right approximately 30 degrees to track it outbnd. Less than 1 min later, dtw approach called and said, 'turn left to 270 degrees, now.' I did not see any other aircraft, but there was apparently a potential conflict. I received subsequent headings that gradually turned me back around until I was given explicit intercept instructions for the dxo 006 degree right. I am a brand new INS pilot, and did most of my practice approachs in and around the minneapolis TCA. Whenever I was vectored through an expected course, minneapolis approach always told me that they were going to do so, and usually gave a reason, such as spacing behind another aircraft. On completion of this flight, I called my instrument and described the above scenario, and his comment was that while I did the right thing if I had suddenly developed radio failure, under normal circumstances I should have followed the last instructions from dtw approach (the assigned heading of 340 degrees) until told something ot the effect of 'resume own navigation.' he did not feel, however,, that dtw approach should have warned me about the deviation from my clearance. He has had considerable experience with both dtw and minneapolis ATC, and felt that dtw lacks the courtesy that he receives at minneapolis. I learned several things from this experience: 1) stay out of the big airports unless I don't have any alternatives. 2) remember to specify 'no SID/STAR' on my IFR flight plans. 3) follow ATC's instructions exactly, unless I lose radio communications (unlikely, since I carry a handheld radio for backup), and request clarification if I receive conflicting instructions before taking any action to the contrary.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HEADING AND TRACK DEVIATION ON RADAR DEP.

Narrative: WHEN I FILED MY FLT PLAN, I FORGOT TO MENTION 'NO SID' IN THE REMARKS, SO DTW CLRNC DELIVERY READ OFF MY CLRNC AND THE AMENDMENTS TO MY FLT PLAN, AND SPECIFIED THE MINGO 7 DEP. SINCE THIS WAS MY FIRST IFR DEP FROM A LARGE AND BUSY ARPT, IT DIDN'T REGISTER UNTIL I LOOKED AT THE CHARTS AND REALIZED THAT I COULDN'T FIND THE INTXN THAT HE HAD NAMED. AFTER SEVERAL FUTILE ATTEMPTS TO GET A CLARIFICATION FROM CLRNC DELIVER, I FINALLY CONTACTED DTW GND CTL AND EXPLAINED MY DILEMMA, AND HE AMENDED MY CLRNC TO: 'RADAR VECTORS TO INTERCEPT THE DXO 006 R.' I DEPARTED RWY 3R, AND WAS GIVEN AN IMMEDIATE LEFT TURN BY THE TWR TO 320 DEGS, WHICH TOOK ME ACROSS THE TOP OF THE ARPT. I WAS BARELY OUTSIDE THE ARPT BOUNDARY WHEN I WAS SWITCHED OVER TO DTW APCH, WHO GAVE ME A NEW HDG OF 340 DEGS. I WAS STILL CLBING (HAVING BEEN CLRED TO 5000') AND WAS JUST STARTING TO ENTER THE CLOUDS WHEN I BEGAN TO INTERCEPT THE DXO 006 DEG R. SINCE MY CLRNC EXPLICITLY STATED THAT I WAS TO INTERCEPT THIS RADIAL, I TURNED RIGHT APPROX 30 DEGS TO TRACK IT OUTBND. LESS THAN 1 MIN LATER, DTW APCH CALLED AND SAID, 'TURN LEFT TO 270 DEGS, NOW.' I DID NOT SEE ANY OTHER ACFT, BUT THERE WAS APPARENTLY A POTENTIAL CONFLICT. I RECEIVED SUBSEQUENT HDGS THAT GRADUALLY TURNED ME BACK AROUND UNTIL I WAS GIVEN EXPLICIT INTERCEPT INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE DXO 006 DEG R. I AM A BRAND NEW INS PLT, AND DID MOST OF MY PRACTICE APCHS IN AND AROUND THE MINNEAPOLIS TCA. WHENEVER I WAS VECTORED THROUGH AN EXPECTED COURSE, MINNEAPOLIS APCH ALWAYS TOLD ME THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO SO, AND USUALLY GAVE A REASON, SUCH AS SPACING BEHIND ANOTHER ACFT. ON COMPLETION OF THIS FLT, I CALLED MY INSTR AND DESCRIBED THE ABOVE SCENARIO, AND HIS COMMENT WAS THAT WHILE I DID THE RIGHT THING IF I HAD SUDDENLY DEVELOPED RADIO FAILURE, UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES I SHOULD HAVE FOLLOWED THE LAST INSTRUCTIONS FROM DTW APCH (THE ASSIGNED HDG OF 340 DEGS) UNTIL TOLD SOMETHING OT THE EFFECT OF 'RESUME OWN NAV.' HE DID NOT FEEL, HOWEVER,, THAT DTW APCH SHOULD HAVE WARNED ME ABOUT THE DEVIATION FROM MY CLRNC. HE HAS HAD CONSIDERABLE EXPERIENCE WITH BOTH DTW AND MINNEAPOLIS ATC, AND FELT THAT DTW LACKS THE COURTESY THAT HE RECEIVES AT MINNEAPOLIS. I LEARNED SEVERAL THINGS FROM THIS EXPERIENCE: 1) STAY OUT OF THE BIG ARPTS UNLESS I DON'T HAVE ANY ALTERNATIVES. 2) REMEMBER TO SPECIFY 'NO SID/STAR' ON MY IFR FLT PLANS. 3) FOLLOW ATC'S INSTRUCTIONS EXACTLY, UNLESS I LOSE RADIO COMS (UNLIKELY, SINCE I CARRY A HANDHELD RADIO FOR BACKUP), AND REQUEST CLARIFICATION IF I RECEIVE CONFLICTING INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE TAKING ANY ACTION TO THE CONTRARY.

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.