Narrative:

An airway deviation occurred abeam dbl (red table VOR) south of j- 60 swbound. I was PF in the left seat. I had filed an IFR flight plan from mke to lax. (Mke direct mcw J-148 onl J-114 den J-60 hec downe 3 arrival to lax.) I gave the flight plan to the chief pilot/first officer who then started the APU and prepared the airplane for departure. Clearance delivery issued the following clearance: mke direct siber intersection direct mcw as filed, maintain 5000 ft, departure control on 125.35, and squawk XXXX. As I preflted the exterior, got ice, coffee and catering, first officer programmed the 2 long range navigation units. As I entered the cockpit we noticed a battery hot light came on and while trouble- shooting what ultimately was a false indication, our passenger arrived early. I later found out that these conditions led to an incomplete programming of the navigation units beyond den VOR. It is important to note that this is contrary to the procedure we always follow, that is for both of us to xchk the navigation charts with the programmed units, the VOR's and the clearance received from ATC, however the aforementioned distrs had broken our normal procedural loop. What resulted was J-60 being defined in our navigation units as den direct hec instead of den direct dbl (red table VOR). As stated earlier, it has always been our standard practice to check each passing fix with navigation units, VOR, chart, and clearance, however, over den we failed to do this. Supplemental information from acn 241588: as we taxied out, I decided that in order to expedite our departure and complete the checklist in the proper manner, I would have to complete the route programming without xchking with the navigation chart. My thought at the time was that I would have plenty of time in the air to complete the den to lax chart confirmation, and so I finished the programming by just looking at the slip of paper with the filed routing. The navigation computer was now loaded with siber, mcw, onl, ponny, den, hec, downe, lax. About 30 seconds after takeoff there was an area of thunderstorms in our flight path. We requested and received deviation as necessary. In my mind and for whatever reason, I thought that J-60 was a direct route from den to hec without any vors in between. It took ATC almost 100 mi to notice or inform us that we were not on the assigned airway. The frequency did not sound busy. Would it be unreasonable to expect ATC to have informed us of the deviation within 10 mi or so of passing the den VOR? Or at the very least when we exceeded the airway boundary limits which should have occurred about 30 mi west of den VOR.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CORP FLC MISPROGRAMS NAV COMPUTER. NAV ERROR.

Narrative: AN AIRWAY DEV OCCURRED ABEAM DBL (RED TABLE VOR) S OF J- 60 SWBOUND. I WAS PF IN THE L SEAT. I HAD FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM MKE TO LAX. (MKE DIRECT MCW J-148 ONL J-114 DEN J-60 HEC DOWNE 3 ARR TO LAX.) I GAVE THE FLT PLAN TO THE CHIEF PLT/FO WHO THEN STARTED THE APU AND PREPARED THE AIRPLANE FOR DEP. CLRNC DELIVERY ISSUED THE FOLLOWING CLRNC: MKE DIRECT SIBER INTXN DIRECT MCW AS FILED, MAINTAIN 5000 FT, DEP CTL ON 125.35, AND SQUAWK XXXX. AS I PREFLTED THE EXTERIOR, GOT ICE, COFFEE AND CATERING, FO PROGRAMMED THE 2 LONG RANGE NAV UNITS. AS I ENTERED THE COCKPIT WE NOTICED A BATTERY HOT LIGHT CAME ON AND WHILE TROUBLE- SHOOTING WHAT ULTIMATELY WAS A FALSE INDICATION, OUR PAX ARRIVED EARLY. I LATER FOUND OUT THAT THESE CONDITIONS LED TO AN INCOMPLETE PROGRAMMING OF THE NAV UNITS BEYOND DEN VOR. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE PROC WE ALWAYS FOLLOW, THAT IS FOR BOTH OF US TO XCHK THE NAV CHARTS WITH THE PROGRAMMED UNITS, THE VOR'S AND THE CLRNC RECEIVED FROM ATC, HOWEVER THE AFOREMENTIONED DISTRS HAD BROKEN OUR NORMAL PROCEDURAL LOOP. WHAT RESULTED WAS J-60 BEING DEFINED IN OUR NAV UNITS AS DEN DIRECT HEC INSTEAD OF DEN DIRECT DBL (RED TABLE VOR). AS STATED EARLIER, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN OUR STANDARD PRACTICE TO CHK EACH PASSING FIX WITH NAV UNITS, VOR, CHART, AND CLRNC, HOWEVER, OVER DEN WE FAILED TO DO THIS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 241588: AS WE TAXIED OUT, I DECIDED THAT IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE OUR DEP AND COMPLETE THE CHKLIST IN THE PROPER MANNER, I WOULD HAVE TO COMPLETE THE RTE PROGRAMMING WITHOUT XCHKING WITH THE NAV CHART. MY THOUGHT AT THE TIME WAS THAT I WOULD HAVE PLENTY OF TIME IN THE AIR TO COMPLETE THE DEN TO LAX CHART CONFIRMATION, AND SO I FINISHED THE PROGRAMMING BY JUST LOOKING AT THE SLIP OF PAPER WITH THE FILED ROUTING. THE NAV COMPUTER WAS NOW LOADED WITH SIBER, MCW, ONL, PONNY, DEN, HEC, DOWNE, LAX. ABOUT 30 SECONDS AFTER TKOF THERE WAS AN AREA OF TSTMS IN OUR FLT PATH. WE REQUESTED AND RECEIVED DEV AS NECESSARY. IN MY MIND AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, I THOUGHT THAT J-60 WAS A DIRECT RTE FROM DEN TO HEC WITHOUT ANY VORS IN BTWN. IT TOOK ATC ALMOST 100 MI TO NOTICE OR INFORM US THAT WE WERE NOT ON THE ASSIGNED AIRWAY. THE FREQ DID NOT SOUND BUSY. WOULD IT BE UNREASONABLE TO EXPECT ATC TO HAVE INFORMED US OF THE DEV WITHIN 10 MI OR SO OF PASSING THE DEN VOR? OR AT THE VERY LEAST WHEN WE EXCEEDED THE AIRWAY BOUNDARY LIMITS WHICH SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED ABOUT 30 MI W OF DEN VOR.

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.