Narrative:

The pre departure clearance showed us cleared for the arthur kill departure out of ewr. This was a new SID which I had not flown yet. My copilot said he flew it the other day and that it is just like the ewr 4 departure with a 250 degree heading as we had been seeing on pre departure clearance's for the last few months. I took a quick look at the SID and concurred with his assessment. We were going to the lanna transition and I noted the part of the SID which said to expect vectors to lanna via the sbj 274 degree radial. We took off from ewr runway 22R and went to the 250 degree heading at 2.3 DME and continued our climb to 5000 ft. Shortly thereafter, the controller said in any angry tone that we were violating the SID and leaving his airspace. He gave us a heading to intercept the sbj 100 degree radial. I dialed up the 100 degree radial and saw that we had gone a bit past it. The controller asked if I saw where it said to intercept the sbj 100 degree radial on the SID. I said yes, and that I had missed that part in the fine print. Aside from trusting my copilot's previous arthur kill experience (he later admitted not having done a westerly transition) and months of preconditioning from pre departure clearance's with 250 degree headings for vectors I feel that the SID depiction is not clear and can be misleading. While it does mention intercepting the 100 degree radial off sbj in the paragraph, the section below stands out more where it says lanna transitions expect vectors via the sbj 274 degree radial. Also, the pictorial view shows a 250 degree radial but not an intercept of the sbj 100 degree radial. I believe the SID depiction should be improved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT, WHILE FLYING THE EWR ARTHUR KILL 1 SID, MISREAD CHART AND FAILED TO NOTICE THEY WERE TO INTERCEPT THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL. RPTR CITES POOR CHART DESIGN. THEY WERE EXPECTING VECTORS.

Narrative: THE PDC SHOWED US CLRED FOR THE ARTHUR KILL DEP OUT OF EWR. THIS WAS A NEW SID WHICH I HAD NOT FLOWN YET. MY COPLT SAID HE FLEW IT THE OTHER DAY AND THAT IT IS JUST LIKE THE EWR 4 DEP WITH A 250 DEG HDG AS WE HAD BEEN SEEING ON PDC'S FOR THE LAST FEW MONTHS. I TOOK A QUICK LOOK AT THE SID AND CONCURRED WITH HIS ASSESSMENT. WE WERE GOING TO THE LANNA TRANSITION AND I NOTED THE PART OF THE SID WHICH SAID TO EXPECT VECTORS TO LANNA VIA THE SBJ 274 DEG RADIAL. WE TOOK OFF FROM EWR RWY 22R AND WENT TO THE 250 DEG HDG AT 2.3 DME AND CONTINUED OUR CLB TO 5000 FT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE CTLR SAID IN ANY ANGRY TONE THAT WE WERE VIOLATING THE SID AND LEAVING HIS AIRSPACE. HE GAVE US A HDG TO INTERCEPT THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL. I DIALED UP THE 100 DEG RADIAL AND SAW THAT WE HAD GONE A BIT PAST IT. THE CTLR ASKED IF I SAW WHERE IT SAID TO INTERCEPT THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL ON THE SID. I SAID YES, AND THAT I HAD MISSED THAT PART IN THE FINE PRINT. ASIDE FROM TRUSTING MY COPLT'S PREVIOUS ARTHUR KILL EXPERIENCE (HE LATER ADMITTED NOT HAVING DONE A WESTERLY TRANSITION) AND MONTHS OF PRECONDITIONING FROM PDC'S WITH 250 DEG HDGS FOR VECTORS I FEEL THAT THE SID DEPICTION IS NOT CLR AND CAN BE MISLEADING. WHILE IT DOES MENTION INTERCEPTING THE 100 DEG RADIAL OFF SBJ IN THE PARAGRAPH, THE SECTION BELOW STANDS OUT MORE WHERE IT SAYS LANNA TRANSITIONS EXPECT VECTORS VIA THE SBJ 274 DEG RADIAL. ALSO, THE PICTORIAL VIEW SHOWS A 250 DEG RADIAL BUT NOT AN INTERCEPT OF THE SBJ 100 DEG RADIAL. I BELIEVE THE SID DEPICTION SHOULD BE IMPROVED.

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.