Narrative:

During a VOR a approach to new haven airport while on an IFR flight plan (WX was better than 10000 ft and 10 mi visibility), the student misread the approach plate and departed the madison VOR on the 047 degree radial in lieu of the proper published transition. At the altitude we were at we had been informed that radar service had been lost. I wanted to allow the student sufficient time to analyze the situation since we were not getting any indication of closure on the desired intersection. I felt it was important to monitor his reaction. I had to point out the error and he proceeded to turn to the proper heading and twist in the proper radial. Approach then called and asked for an update on our position. Unfortunately, he replied we were north of the VOR to which approach replied with a small essay on protected airspace areas during the approach. When I could finally get to talk on frequency, I informed approach that we were south of the VOR established on the published transition. He (approach) confirmed what I had informed him of, relative to our position, and I informed him of the error the student had made. He explained his initial concern and requested that I inform ATC of any deviations from published procedures. I certainly would have advised ATC if there was a means to talk discretely to ATC without the student being able to hear the conversation. Wasn't that why the 'option' approach was devised? (So the student would not hear ahead of time?) an obvious solution for this situation would have been to shoot the approach VFR, however, here in the northeast the phrase 'unable practice approachs, state your intentions' is all too often the response to such a request.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: STUDENT PLT DOES NOT TRACK AIRWAY.

Narrative: DURING A VOR A APCH TO NEW HAVEN ARPT WHILE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN (WX WAS BETTER THAN 10000 FT AND 10 MI VISIBILITY), THE STUDENT MISREAD THE APCH PLATE AND DEPARTED THE MADISON VOR ON THE 047 DEG RADIAL IN LIEU OF THE PROPER PUBLISHED TRANSITION. AT THE ALT WE WERE AT WE HAD BEEN INFORMED THAT RADAR SVC HAD BEEN LOST. I WANTED TO ALLOW THE STUDENT SUFFICIENT TIME TO ANALYZE THE SIT SINCE WE WERE NOT GETTING ANY INDICATION OF CLOSURE ON THE DESIRED INTXN. I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO MONITOR HIS REACTION. I HAD TO POINT OUT THE ERROR AND HE PROCEEDED TO TURN TO THE PROPER HDG AND TWIST IN THE PROPER RADIAL. APCH THEN CALLED AND ASKED FOR AN UPDATE ON OUR POS. UNFORTUNATELY, HE REPLIED WE WERE N OF THE VOR TO WHICH APCH REPLIED WITH A SMALL ESSAY ON PROTECTED AIRSPACE AREAS DURING THE APCH. WHEN I COULD FINALLY GET TO TALK ON FREQ, I INFORMED APCH THAT WE WERE S OF THE VOR ESTABLISHED ON THE PUBLISHED TRANSITION. HE (APCH) CONFIRMED WHAT I HAD INFORMED HIM OF, RELATIVE TO OUR POS, AND I INFORMED HIM OF THE ERROR THE STUDENT HAD MADE. HE EXPLAINED HIS INITIAL CONCERN AND REQUESTED THAT I INFORM ATC OF ANY DEVS FROM PUBLISHED PROCS. I CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE ADVISED ATC IF THERE WAS A MEANS TO TALK DISCRETELY TO ATC WITHOUT THE STUDENT BEING ABLE TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION. WASN'T THAT WHY THE 'OPTION' APCH WAS DEVISED? (SO THE STUDENT WOULD NOT HEAR AHEAD OF TIME?) AN OBVIOUS SOLUTION FOR THIS SIT WOULD HAVE BEEN TO SHOOT THE APCH VFR, HOWEVER, HERE IN THE NE THE PHRASE 'UNABLE PRACTICE APCHS, STATE YOUR INTENTIONS' IS ALL TOO OFTEN THE RESPONSE TO SUCH A REQUEST.

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.