Narrative:

I took off on runway 9 essentially flying runway heading to intercept the 024 degree radial of kansas city VOR to begin the royal 2 departure, jethro transition. Approximately 2 mi from the VOR I began my turn to intercept. While in the turn, departure control assigned a '010 degree vector to intercept the transition.' I rolled out at 010 degrees. (I believed the vector was a courtesy call since I was in the cone of confusion when the controller gave the vector). Almost immediately the course came alive and I was on the 024 degree radial. I then began a turn to 024 degrees to stay on the course. The captain intervened and said to fly 010 degrees to intercept the 050 degrees out of topeka. I said I don't think that is what the controller had in mind, we should query. He said no and to fly 010 degrees. So I turned left to 010 degrees. The controller within a min said we had 'blown through the radial' and to 'fly 040 degrees to re-intercept.' I again asked the captain to query and he said no, to fly 040 degrees. The controller then said that we had blown through the radial a second time and asked what radial we were trying to intercept? The captain said the 050 degree and the controller said we should be on the 024 degree. He then vectored us off the SID. (Very embarrassing.) captain is anti-CRM and at the same time lacks situational awareness. He builds up barriers in the cockpit and apparently with ATC also. The initial vector of 010 degrees was unnecessary even though it was well intentioned. In this case it confused the captain rather than aided. I think the controllers should have had us call him upon landing. This was just too simple a departure to mess it up this badly. This would allow the FAA to evaluate the situation (after an interview with the pilots it would be obvious what the real problem is) and take corrective action.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF A B727 FAILED TO FOLLOW THE SID TRACK RESULTING IN ATC INTERVENTION TO VECTOR THEM ONTO THE CORRECT COURSE.

Narrative: I TOOK OFF ON RWY 9 ESSENTIALLY FLYING RWY HDG TO INTERCEPT THE 024 DEG RADIAL OF KANSAS CITY VOR TO BEGIN THE ROYAL 2 DEP, JETHRO TRANSITION. APPROX 2 MI FROM THE VOR I BEGAN MY TURN TO INTERCEPT. WHILE IN THE TURN, DEP CTL ASSIGNED A '010 DEG VECTOR TO INTERCEPT THE TRANSITION.' I ROLLED OUT AT 010 DEGS. (I BELIEVED THE VECTOR WAS A COURTESY CALL SINCE I WAS IN THE CONE OF CONFUSION WHEN THE CTLR GAVE THE VECTOR). ALMOST IMMEDIATELY THE COURSE CAME ALIVE AND I WAS ON THE 024 DEG RADIAL. I THEN BEGAN A TURN TO 024 DEGS TO STAY ON THE COURSE. THE CAPT INTERVENED AND SAID TO FLY 010 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE 050 DEGS OUT OF TOPEKA. I SAID I DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT THE CTLR HAD IN MIND, WE SHOULD QUERY. HE SAID NO AND TO FLY 010 DEGS. SO I TURNED L TO 010 DEGS. THE CTLR WITHIN A MIN SAID WE HAD 'BLOWN THROUGH THE RADIAL' AND TO 'FLY 040 DEGS TO RE-INTERCEPT.' I AGAIN ASKED THE CAPT TO QUERY AND HE SAID NO, TO FLY 040 DEGS. THE CTLR THEN SAID THAT WE HAD BLOWN THROUGH THE RADIAL A SECOND TIME AND ASKED WHAT RADIAL WE WERE TRYING TO INTERCEPT? THE CAPT SAID THE 050 DEG AND THE CTLR SAID WE SHOULD BE ON THE 024 DEG. HE THEN VECTORED US OFF THE SID. (VERY EMBARRASSING.) CAPT IS ANTI-CRM AND AT THE SAME TIME LACKS SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. HE BUILDS UP BARRIERS IN THE COCKPIT AND APPARENTLY WITH ATC ALSO. THE INITIAL VECTOR OF 010 DEGS WAS UNNECESSARY EVEN THOUGH IT WAS WELL INTENTIONED. IN THIS CASE IT CONFUSED THE CAPT RATHER THAN AIDED. I THINK THE CTLRS SHOULD HAVE HAD US CALL HIM UPON LNDG. THIS WAS JUST TOO SIMPLE A DEP TO MESS IT UP THIS BADLY. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE FAA TO EVALUATE THE SIT (AFTER AN INTERVIEW WITH THE PLTS IT WOULD BE OBVIOUS WHAT THE REAL PROB IS) AND TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION.

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.