Narrative:

Flying the arthur kill one departure out of ewr. Cleared for the parke transition, we followed the SID to the 250 degree heading after the 2.3 DME arc. We remained on the heading until the controller queried us as to our intentions of joining the sbj 100 degree radial. We immediately realized our mistake and turned to intercept the radial and no further mention of the occurrence ensued. I feel contributing factors to the occurrence were inadequate preflight briefing and inadequate depiction on the departure chart. The captain briefed the departure prior to engine start as is standard for our checklist. The captain seemed familiar with newark operations but expected a different departure and was surprised when clearance issued the departure to us. As he briefed, I listened but did not follow closely on my own chart as I believed the captain was familiar with the departure. Just looking at the pictorial representation as I usually do, I assumed the briefing to be complete, and did not catch the exclusion of the intercept. Since the occurrence I have been following more closely all briefings given by capts regardless of perceived experience level, and I am reading all textual descriptions relating to cleared rtes. I feel future occurrences can also be avoided if the pictorial presentation on the commercial charts are more obvious.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MDT, WHILE FLYING THE EWR ARTHUR KILL ONE SID, MISREAD CHART AND FAILED TO NOTICE THEY WERE TO INTERCEPT THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL. RPTR CITES POOR CHART DESIGN.

Narrative: FLYING THE ARTHUR KILL ONE DEP OUT OF EWR. CLRED FOR THE PARKE TRANSITION, WE FOLLOWED THE SID TO THE 250 DEG HDG AFTER THE 2.3 DME ARC. WE REMAINED ON THE HEADING UNTIL THE CTLR QUERIED US AS TO OUR INTENTIONS OF JOINING THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL. WE IMMEDIATELY REALIZED OUR MISTAKE AND TURNED TO INTERCEPT THE RADIAL AND NO FURTHER MENTION OF THE OCCURRENCE ENSUED. I FEEL CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THE OCCURRENCE WERE INADEQUATE PREFLT BRIEFING AND INADEQUATE DEPICTION ON THE DEP CHART. THE CAPT BRIEFED THE DEP PRIOR TO ENG START AS IS STANDARD FOR OUR CHKLIST. THE CAPT SEEMED FAMILIAR WITH NEWARK OPS BUT EXPECTED A DIFFERENT DEP AND WAS SURPRISED WHEN CLRNC ISSUED THE DEP TO US. AS HE BRIEFED, I LISTENED BUT DID NOT FOLLOW CLOSELY ON MY OWN CHART AS I BELIEVED THE CAPT WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE DEP. JUST LOOKING AT THE PICTORIAL REPRESENTATION AS I USUALLY DO, I ASSUMED THE BRIEFING TO BE COMPLETE, AND DID NOT CATCH THE EXCLUSION OF THE INTERCEPT. SINCE THE OCCURRENCE I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING MORE CLOSELY ALL BRIEFINGS GIVEN BY CAPTS REGARDLESS OF PERCEIVED EXPERIENCE LEVEL, AND I AM READING ALL TEXTUAL DESCRIPTIONS RELATING TO CLRED RTES. I FEEL FUTURE OCCURRENCES CAN ALSO BE AVOIDED IF THE PICTORIAL PRESENTATION ON THE COMMERCIAL CHARTS ARE MORE OBVIOUS.

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.