Narrative:

During initial FMS loading/verification of route spane-ffu- slc did not include other points on SID. En route entry of additional points for landing to south at slc. Boagy was inserted erroneously prior to spane instead of after spane. We noted descent clearance seemed somewhat early for crossing spane at FL190, but didn't pick up on the fact that route was boagy direct spane instead of spane direct boagy. Descent of about 1000 FPM initiated for arrival at FL190 and 280 KTS prior to spane. Center called to question our navigation. Noted we were north of course. Went to manual navigation, crosschecked direct on FMS and realized the error. Center assigned us a heading for vectors for approach and I initiated and expedited descent with speed brakes to attempt to regain altitude compliance. Further descent clearance to 17000 ft also issued with vector. Although no mention was made of altitude or crossing problem by center, I assume we would not have been in compliance by spane as we were nearly there when corrective action initiated and vector issued. Handoff to approach was given by center, so no follow-up was available from ATC and approach continued normally. To the best of my knowledge, there was no conflict with any other traffic. A closer review of the SID or a follow-up on the question of the early descent raised would have caught the programming error. Supplemental information from acn 392023: approaching slc we were given clearance to cross spane at FL190. We thought clearance seemed 'early' due to distance to spane. We began descent to reach spane at FL190 based on bad data. At about 5 mi from spane ATC said they showed us about 5 mi north of arrival track. This is when we noticed program error. We were at FL230. We immediately went to manual navigation (VOR) and expedited descent. We missed our spane restr by about 2000 ft. Although boagy was verified as a correct fix on the spane 3 arrival we missed the fact that it was inserted in the wrong location. Had we been more diligent in the route change or questioned 'early' descent clearance for spane, this error would not have occurred.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN L1011 DSNDING IN ZLC AIRSPACE FAILS TO PROGRAM THE COMPUTER ROUTING PROPERLY AND CROSSES THE ASSIGNED WAYPOINT 2000 FT HIGH.

Narrative: DURING INITIAL FMS LOADING/VERIFICATION OF RTE SPANE-FFU- SLC DID NOT INCLUDE OTHER POINTS ON SID. ENRTE ENTRY OF ADDITIONAL POINTS FOR LNDG TO S AT SLC. BOAGY WAS INSERTED ERRONEOUSLY PRIOR TO SPANE INSTEAD OF AFTER SPANE. WE NOTED DSCNT CLRNC SEEMED SOMEWHAT EARLY FOR XING SPANE AT FL190, BUT DIDN'T PICK UP ON THE FACT THAT RTE WAS BOAGY DIRECT SPANE INSTEAD OF SPANE DIRECT BOAGY. DSCNT OF ABOUT 1000 FPM INITIATED FOR ARR AT FL190 AND 280 KTS PRIOR TO SPANE. CTR CALLED TO QUESTION OUR NAV. NOTED WE WERE N OF COURSE. WENT TO MANUAL NAV, XCHKED DIRECT ON FMS AND REALIZED THE ERROR. CTR ASSIGNED US A HDG FOR VECTORS FOR APCH AND I INITIATED AND EXPEDITED DSCNT WITH SPD BRAKES TO ATTEMPT TO REGAIN ALT COMPLIANCE. FURTHER DSCNT CLRNC TO 17000 FT ALSO ISSUED WITH VECTOR. ALTHOUGH NO MENTION WAS MADE OF ALT OR XING PROB BY CTR, I ASSUME WE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN COMPLIANCE BY SPANE AS WE WERE NEARLY THERE WHEN CORRECTIVE ACTION INITIATED AND VECTOR ISSUED. HDOF TO APCH WAS GIVEN BY CTR, SO NO FOLLOW-UP WAS AVAILABLE FROM ATC AND APCH CONTINUED NORMALLY. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE WAS NO CONFLICT WITH ANY OTHER TFC. A CLOSER REVIEW OF THE SID OR A FOLLOW-UP ON THE QUESTION OF THE EARLY DSCNT RAISED WOULD HAVE CAUGHT THE PROGRAMMING ERROR. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 392023: APCHING SLC WE WERE GIVEN CLRNC TO CROSS SPANE AT FL190. WE THOUGHT CLRNC SEEMED 'EARLY' DUE TO DISTANCE TO SPANE. WE BEGAN DSCNT TO REACH SPANE AT FL190 BASED ON BAD DATA. AT ABOUT 5 MI FROM SPANE ATC SAID THEY SHOWED US ABOUT 5 MI N OF ARR TRACK. THIS IS WHEN WE NOTICED PROGRAM ERROR. WE WERE AT FL230. WE IMMEDIATELY WENT TO MANUAL NAV (VOR) AND EXPEDITED DSCNT. WE MISSED OUR SPANE RESTR BY ABOUT 2000 FT. ALTHOUGH BOAGY WAS VERIFIED AS A CORRECT FIX ON THE SPANE 3 ARR WE MISSED THE FACT THAT IT WAS INSERTED IN THE WRONG LOCATION. HAD WE BEEN MORE DILIGENT IN THE RTE CHANGE OR QUESTIONED 'EARLY' DSCNT CLRNC FOR SPANE, THIS ERROR WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED.

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.