Narrative:

I feel the problem arose when shanwick oceanic changed our flight plan from navigation track D to navigation track C. Not having a flight plan for navigation track C, I wrote over the coordinates for the crossing, failing to change the last fix which was porgy. Moncton center picked up our squawk and gave us a heading back on course and advised us of the navigation error. The contributing factors were distrs of other aircraft inquiring about our flight over (eastbound) where a man claimed to want access to our flight deck and also to have possession of a gun. I feel that if we had a flight plan for navigation track C where I could have discarded the flight plan for navigation track D, rather than overexpose the new coordinates. This mistake could have been avoided regardless of the distrs we experienced. I feel the entire flight crew human performance was compromised by the day before events. A passenger on our flight over to europe wanted access to our flight deck and claimed to have a gun. The excessive amount of reports and interviews by police and company people made it almost impossible to get proper rest. Supplemental information from acn 249681: when the INS's were reloaded, I made my usual check on #3 INS and the coordinates corresponded to the remote loading of #1 and #2 INS. I do not have the aeronautical charts since they are not required or issued to so's and as far as I could tell, everything looked normal. As soon as I can get these charts from an old revision I intend to do so and use them as a backup. Also, on the plotting charts we have it would be beneficial if they had the coordinates printed at the navigational fixes. Supplemental information from acn 249661: I was flying the aircraft, the captain was handling the radio and the navigation paper work. He changed all coordinates on the flight plan to reflect track C, however, in anticipation of getting back on the original flight plan and NA238 route, he only changed the name from loach to porgy and failed to change the appropriate coordinates for porgy. After passing n58w50, during our xchk, I read the coordinates for the next waypoint of the INS and the captain verified them of the flight plan, failing to see that he was using the coordinates for loach. During this time he was trying to make contact with gander center on VHF to get us back to NA238 route on our flight plan. In addition, he was distracted by calls from other aircraft that recognized our call sign and inquired about the gun incident on board our aircraft the previous day en route to lgw. Had we had a flight plan with track C or consulted our chart for the proper coordinates this could have been avoided. A helpful tool would be to have the proper coordinates printed under the correct in/out fixes on the commercial north atlantic plotting charts.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR WDB CREW HAD A NAV ERROR OVER THE NORTH ATLANTIC.

Narrative: I FEEL THE PROB AROSE WHEN SHANWICK OCEANIC CHANGED OUR FLT PLAN FROM NAV TRACK D TO NAV TRACK C. NOT HAVING A FLT PLAN FOR NAV TRACK C, I WROTE OVER THE COORDINATES FOR THE XING, FAILING TO CHANGE THE LAST FIX WHICH WAS PORGY. MONCTON CTR PICKED UP OUR SQUAWK AND GAVE US A HDG BACK ON COURSE AND ADVISED US OF THE NAV ERROR. THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE DISTRS OF OTHER ACFT INQUIRING ABOUT OUR FLT OVER (EBOUND) WHERE A MAN CLAIMED TO WANT ACCESS TO OUR FLT DECK AND ALSO TO HAVE POSSESSION OF A GUN. I FEEL THAT IF WE HAD A FLT PLAN FOR NAV TRACK C WHERE I COULD HAVE DISCARDED THE FLT PLAN FOR NAV TRACK D, RATHER THAN OVEREXPOSE THE NEW COORDINATES. THIS MISTAKE COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED REGARDLESS OF THE DISTRS WE EXPERIENCED. I FEEL THE ENTIRE FLC HUMAN PERFORMANCE WAS COMPROMISED BY THE DAY BEFORE EVENTS. A PAX ON OUR FLT OVER TO EUROPE WANTED ACCESS TO OUR FLT DECK AND CLAIMED TO HAVE A GUN. THE EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF RPTS AND INTERVIEWS BY POLICE AND COMPANY PEOPLE MADE IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO GET PROPER REST. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM ACN 249681: WHEN THE INS'S WERE RELOADED, I MADE MY USUAL CHK ON #3 INS AND THE COORDINATES CORRESPONDED TO THE REMOTE LOADING OF #1 AND #2 INS. I DO NOT HAVE THE AERO CHARTS SINCE THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED OR ISSUED TO SO'S AND AS FAR AS I COULD TELL, EVERYTHING LOOKED NORMAL. AS SOON AS I CAN GET THESE CHARTS FROM AN OLD REVISION I INTEND TO DO SO AND USE THEM AS A BACKUP. ALSO, ON THE PLOTTING CHARTS WE HAVE IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IF THEY HAD THE COORDINATES PRINTED AT THE NAVIGATIONAL FIXES. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM ACN 249661: I WAS FLYING THE ACFT, THE CAPT WAS HANDLING THE RADIO AND THE NAV PAPER WORK. HE CHANGED ALL COORDINATES ON THE FLT PLAN TO REFLECT TRACK C, HOWEVER, IN ANTICIPATION OF GETTING BACK ON THE ORIGINAL FLT PLAN AND NA238 RTE, HE ONLY CHANGED THE NAME FROM LOACH TO PORGY AND FAILED TO CHANGE THE APPROPRIATE COORDINATES FOR PORGY. AFTER PASSING N58W50, DURING OUR XCHK, I READ THE COORDINATES FOR THE NEXT WAYPOINT OF THE INS AND THE CAPT VERIFIED THEM OF THE FLT PLAN, FAILING TO SEE THAT HE WAS USING THE COORDINATES FOR LOACH. DURING THIS TIME HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE CONTACT WITH GANDER CTR ON VHF TO GET US BACK TO NA238 RTE ON OUR FLT PLAN. IN ADDITION, HE WAS DISTRACTED BY CALLS FROM OTHER ACFT THAT RECOGNIZED OUR CALL SIGN AND INQUIRED ABOUT THE GUN INCIDENT ON BOARD OUR ACFT THE PREVIOUS DAY ENRTE TO LGW. HAD WE HAD A FLT PLAN WITH TRACK C OR CONSULTED OUR CHART FOR THE PROPER COORDINATES THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. A HELPFUL TOOL WOULD BE TO HAVE THE PROPER COORDINATES PRINTED UNDER THE CORRECT IN/OUT FIXES ON THE COMMERCIAL NORTH ATLANTIC PLOTTING CHARTS.

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.