Narrative:

Our flight plan and filed clearance read as follows: 'phx.DRYHT2.dryht..ach.J231.lbl.J19.stl..tth..rod. Pre departure clearance J152.jst.bo JID1.phl.' we received our ACARS clearance, which read 'phx.DRYHT2.dryht..ach,flight plan route.' after takeoff, we complied with the dryht SID and were eventually cleared direct to the dryht intersection. After dryht, we proceeded to fly the published transition to anton chico (ach) via the published transition over socorro (onm) VOR, then to ach. After dryht, we were about 30 NM (or so) east, inbound to onm on the 261 degree radial, inbound to onm. The controller then questioned our routing, and advised us that we were 40 NM south of course, and that we should have proceeded 'direct' to anton chico (ach), after passing dryht. The controller said it happens often, and that the SID is misleading, and that ATC really intends that pilots proceed to ach (directly) after dryht. ATC confirmed that there was no problem, but to note it for future reference. My first officer had loaded the routine into our FMC, and we checked it together, yet we both apparently misinterped the clearance, as requiring us to fly the ach transition (DRYHT2.ach) except 'DRYHT2.dryht.ach' was slightly different than 'DRYHT2.dryht..ach!' 1 DOT instead of 2 means all the difference! The profile also led us to fly the '.ach' transition, further reinforcing our misinterp. I would recommend that the 'DRYHT2.dryht' SID out of phx be redesigned to reflect the true manner in which ATC intends/clears aircraft to proceed -- and that is from dryht 'direct' to anton chico, and restate the clearance after being cleared direct from the 055 degree heading.!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B752 FLC MISINTERP STORED FLT PLAN AND DEVIATE FROM ASSIGNED COURSE WHILE UNDER ZAB CTL. RPTR SUGGESTS SID CHANGE.

Narrative: OUR FLT PLAN AND FILED CLRNC READ AS FOLLOWS: 'PHX.DRYHT2.DRYHT..ACH.J231.LBL.J19.STL..TTH..ROD. PDC J152.JST.BO JID1.PHL.' WE RECEIVED OUR ACARS CLRNC, WHICH READ 'PHX.DRYHT2.DRYHT..ACH,FLT PLAN RTE.' AFTER TKOF, WE COMPLIED WITH THE DRYHT SID AND WERE EVENTUALLY CLRED DIRECT TO THE DRYHT INTXN. AFTER DRYHT, WE PROCEEDED TO FLY THE PUBLISHED TRANSITION TO ANTON CHICO (ACH) VIA THE PUBLISHED TRANSITION OVER SOCORRO (ONM) VOR, THEN TO ACH. AFTER DRYHT, WE WERE ABOUT 30 NM (OR SO) E, INBOUND TO ONM ON THE 261 DEG RADIAL, INBOUND TO ONM. THE CTLR THEN QUESTIONED OUR ROUTING, AND ADVISED US THAT WE WERE 40 NM S OF COURSE, AND THAT WE SHOULD HAVE PROCEEDED 'DIRECT' TO ANTON CHICO (ACH), AFTER PASSING DRYHT. THE CTLR SAID IT HAPPENS OFTEN, AND THAT THE SID IS MISLEADING, AND THAT ATC REALLY INTENDS THAT PLTS PROCEED TO ACH (DIRECTLY) AFTER DRYHT. ATC CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS NO PROB, BUT TO NOTE IT FOR FUTURE REF. MY FO HAD LOADED THE ROUTINE INTO OUR FMC, AND WE CHKED IT TOGETHER, YET WE BOTH APPARENTLY MISINTERPED THE CLRNC, AS REQUIRING US TO FLY THE ACH TRANSITION (DRYHT2.ACH) EXCEPT 'DRYHT2.DRYHT.ACH' WAS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN 'DRYHT2.DRYHT..ACH!' 1 DOT INSTEAD OF 2 MEANS ALL THE DIFFERENCE! THE PROFILE ALSO LED US TO FLY THE '.ACH' TRANSITION, FURTHER REINFORCING OUR MISINTERP. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE 'DRYHT2.DRYHT' SID OUT OF PHX BE REDESIGNED TO REFLECT THE TRUE MANNER IN WHICH ATC INTENDS/CLRS ACFT TO PROCEED -- AND THAT IS FROM DRYHT 'DIRECT' TO ANTON CHICO, AND RESTATE THE CLRNC AFTER BEING CLRED DIRECT FROM THE 055 DEG HDG.!

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.