Narrative:

Our airplane was dispatched with MEL 34-xx-xx FMS nav database out of date. I didn't realize until during my preflight that we were filed an RNAV departure. The previously mentioned MEL precludes any RNAV procedures in the terminal area. I contacted our dispatcher and he coordinated for a new cpdlc departure clearance which included the zzzzz SID--see attached photo for the exact wording. The departure clearance also included a load review prompt (see attached photo); which I selected and then selected load act. At this point the active flight plan had ZZZ xxr on line one; ZZZZZ1 on line two and ZZZ1 on line three with no discon's. Fast forward to the takeoff position runway xxr; our takeoff clearance was heading 270deg; climb & maintain 5000. Once airborne we received a couple headings with the final heading being 010 deg to join the ZZZZZ1 transition. The first officer entered zzzon the navigation rad page and armed the VOR. The airplane intercepted the radial and flew it outbound. At ZZZZZ1 the FMS transitioned to heading mode. That seemed to be the correct thing to do because the wording in the routing box of the SID read; 'crossing the transition fix; continue on current heading; expect vectors from ZZZ center to join filed route.' we requested direct ZZZ1 from the low sector controller who handed us off to the high sector controller for that request. That controller seemed a bit confounded by our request but he did clear us direct ZZZ1. A few minutes later he asked us if we had time for a question. During the ensuing conversation he stated that ATC understood our flight to be cleared and expected us to fly direct ZZZ1 after ZZZZZ1. He said he (and his colleagues) had no knowledge of the verbiage I mentioned earlier about continuing on current heading.cause: in retrospect; I believe the confusion was generally caused because we were transitioning from a traditional NAVAID departure to an RNAV enroute routing. Specifically; numerous after-the-fact rereads made me realize that the wording and format of our second cpdlc clearance was anything but clear.suggestions: a clearer; more straightforward clearance could have helped alleviate some confusion. Additionally; filing for radar vectors rather a traditional SID on departure would probably be the best course of action when an airplane is not legal to fly RNAV procedures in the terminal area.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD-11 flight crew reported a communication breakdown between with ATC regarding departure clearance.

Narrative: Our airplane was dispatched with MEL 34-XX-XX FMS Nav Database Out of Date. I didn't realize until during my preflight that we were filed an RNAV departure. The previously mentioned MEL precludes any RNAV procedures in the terminal area. I contacted our Dispatcher and he coordinated for a new CPDLC departure clearance which included the ZZZZZ SID--see attached photo for the exact wording. The departure clearance also included a LOAD REVIEW prompt (see attached photo); which I selected and then selected LOAD ACT. At this point the active flight plan had ZZZ XXR on line one; ZZZZZ1 on line two and ZZZ1 on line three with no DISCON's. Fast forward to the takeoff position runway XXR; our takeoff clearance was heading 270deg; climb & maintain 5000. Once airborne we received a couple headings with the final heading being 010 deg to join the ZZZZZ1 transition. The FO entered ZZZon the NAV RAD page and armed the VOR. The airplane intercepted the radial and flew it outbound. At ZZZZZ1 the FMS transitioned to heading mode. That seemed to be the correct thing to do because the wording in the ROUTING box of the SID read; 'Crossing the transition fix; continue on current heading; EXPECT vectors from ZZZ Center to join filed route.' We requested direct ZZZ1 from the low sector controller who handed us off to the high sector controller for that request. That controller seemed a bit confounded by our request but he did clear us direct ZZZ1. A few minutes later he asked us if we had time for a question. During the ensuing conversation he stated that ATC understood our flight to be cleared and expected us to fly direct ZZZ1 after ZZZZZ1. He said he (and his colleagues) had no knowledge of the verbiage I mentioned earlier about continuing on current heading.Cause: In retrospect; I believe the confusion was generally caused because we were transitioning from a traditional NAVAID departure to an RNAV enroute routing. Specifically; numerous after-the-fact rereads made me realize that the wording and format of our second CPDLC clearance was anything but clear.Suggestions: A clearer; more straightforward clearance could have helped alleviate some confusion. Additionally; filing for radar vectors rather a traditional SID on departure would probably be the best course of action when an airplane is not legal to fly RNAV procedures in the terminal area.

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.