Narrative:

FMC stars and FMS transitions. 1) planning on the GLASR4 arrival into sea, we went to enter that in the aircraft FMC and found several problems. The 2 choices were GLASR4 or GLAS16B. Choosing GLASR4 did not bring up any of the necessary approach waypoints. Choosing GLAS16B did bring up the appropriate waypoints. The problem with this is that nothing is our paperwork or commercial charts indicate what FMC routing to select to get the appropriate waypoints. My suggestion is to have the GLASR4 available in the navigation database of the FMC's. The waypoints remain the same up till the final heading regardless which runway you use. Having FMC routings that do not appear under the same name as the charted approach, or with no other notification in our charts only adds unnecessary confusion. 2) even though page xx-yy discusses FMS aubrn or jaksn transitions, these are not available in the FMC. Not available transitions from the STAR, from the ILS, or from the rnv runways. Nor can the waypoints be entered manually. 3) receiving clearance the next morning for a flight to ord, requested the BLUIT4 RNAV departure as per xx-yy. ATC informed us at that time that this procedure was not available per NOTAMS. Reviewing flight paperwork and commercial NOTAMS, nothing was found regarding this. Suggest that all FMC approach/departure routings, and seattle commercial chart pages be reviewed for accuracy and currency.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757-200 FO NOTES NOMENCLATURE DIFFERENCES IN THE FMC DATABASE AND COMMERCIAL CHART THAT DO NOT MATCH.

Narrative: FMC STARS AND FMS TRANSITIONS. 1) PLANNING ON THE GLASR4 ARR INTO SEA, WE WENT TO ENTER THAT IN THE ACFT FMC AND FOUND SEVERAL PROBS. THE 2 CHOICES WERE GLASR4 OR GLAS16B. CHOOSING GLASR4 DID NOT BRING UP ANY OF THE NECESSARY APCH WAYPOINTS. CHOOSING GLAS16B DID BRING UP THE APPROPRIATE WAYPOINTS. THE PROB WITH THIS IS THAT NOTHING IS OUR PAPERWORK OR COMMERCIAL CHARTS INDICATE WHAT FMC ROUTING TO SELECT TO GET THE APPROPRIATE WAYPOINTS. MY SUGGESTION IS TO HAVE THE GLASR4 AVAILABLE IN THE NAV DATABASE OF THE FMC'S. THE WAYPOINTS REMAIN THE SAME UP TILL THE FINAL HEADING REGARDLESS WHICH RWY YOU USE. HAVING FMC ROUTINGS THAT DO NOT APPEAR UNDER THE SAME NAME AS THE CHARTED APCH, OR WITH NO OTHER NOTIFICATION IN OUR CHARTS ONLY ADDS UNNECESSARY CONFUSION. 2) EVEN THOUGH PAGE XX-YY DISCUSSES FMS AUBRN OR JAKSN TRANSITIONS, THESE ARE NOT AVAILABLE IN THE FMC. NOT AVAILABLE TRANSITIONS FROM THE STAR, FROM THE ILS, OR FROM THE RNV RWYS. NOR CAN THE WAYPOINTS BE ENTERED MANUALLY. 3) RECEIVING CLRNC THE NEXT MORNING FOR A FLT TO ORD, REQUESTED THE BLUIT4 RNAV DEP AS PER XX-YY. ATC INFORMED US AT THAT TIME THAT THIS PROC WAS NOT AVAILABLE PER NOTAMS. REVIEWING FLT PAPERWORK AND COMMERCIAL NOTAMS, NOTHING WAS FOUND REGARDING THIS. SUGGEST THAT ALL FMC APCH/DEP ROUTINGS, AND SEATTLE COMMERCIAL CHART PAGES BE REVIEWED FOR ACCURACY AND CURRENCY.

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.