Narrative:

Upon informing bzn ground control of our impending pushback, we were told to expect clearance (to den) on the taxi as we were #2 for IFR departure. On the taxi, but prior to reaching the departure end of runway 30, we received: '...cleared to den V86 lvm mbw as filed....' shortly thereafter, we received clearance for takeoff on runway 30, completed the before takeoff checklists, and departed flying runway heading. Bzn tower handed us off to ZLC who then gave us a climb to FL290. While climbing opposite our desired direction of flight, the captain said he would query ATC for a turn on course if one wasn't received by 15000 ft. Upon reaching 15000 ft, the captain asked ATC for a turn. Slc said we were not in radar contact and then asked our location. Captain said on a 300 degree heading, 20 mi out of bzn. ATC asked if tower gave us runway heading. Captain replied yes. Slc then gave us direct to mbw. Nothing further was mentioned by ATC. Once level at cruise altitude, I reviewed the takeoff and obstacle departure procedure published on the back of the company chart. It states aircraft departing runway 30 should execute a 'climbing left turn to 275 degree heading. All aircraft climb via bzn 284 degree radial....' we failed to perform the procedure as stated. Obstacle clearance was not an issue for the direction of initial flight. I believe there were several contributing factors to this situation: 1) my unfamiliarity with bzn. I relied on the captain to provide information relevant to operations in this area. 2) we flew a trip to bzn 3 days prior, and upon our departure off runway 12, had been given runway heading (contrary to the takeoff and obstacle departure procedure on back of the company procedure).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CL65-RJ FLC FAILS TO FOLLOW THE CHARTED CLB PROC OUT OF BZN, MT.

Narrative: UPON INFORMING BZN GND CTL OF OUR IMPENDING PUSHBACK, WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT CLRNC (TO DEN) ON THE TAXI AS WE WERE #2 FOR IFR DEP. ON THE TAXI, BUT PRIOR TO REACHING THE DEP END OF RWY 30, WE RECEIVED: '...CLRED TO DEN V86 LVM MBW AS FILED....' SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE RECEIVED CLRNC FOR TKOF ON RWY 30, COMPLETED THE BEFORE TKOF CHKLISTS, AND DEPARTED FLYING RWY HDG. BZN TWR HANDED US OFF TO ZLC WHO THEN GAVE US A CLB TO FL290. WHILE CLBING OPPOSITE OUR DESIRED DIRECTION OF FLT, THE CAPT SAID HE WOULD QUERY ATC FOR A TURN ON COURSE IF ONE WASN'T RECEIVED BY 15000 FT. UPON REACHING 15000 FT, THE CAPT ASKED ATC FOR A TURN. SLC SAID WE WERE NOT IN RADAR CONTACT AND THEN ASKED OUR LOCATION. CAPT SAID ON A 300 DEG HDG, 20 MI OUT OF BZN. ATC ASKED IF TWR GAVE US RWY HDG. CAPT REPLIED YES. SLC THEN GAVE US DIRECT TO MBW. NOTHING FURTHER WAS MENTIONED BY ATC. ONCE LEVEL AT CRUISE ALT, I REVIEWED THE TKOF AND OBSTACLE DEP PROC PUBLISHED ON THE BACK OF THE COMPANY CHART. IT STATES ACFT DEPARTING RWY 30 SHOULD EXECUTE A 'CLBING L TURN TO 275 DEG HDG. ALL ACFT CLB VIA BZN 284 DEG RADIAL....' WE FAILED TO PERFORM THE PROC AS STATED. OBSTACLE CLRNC WAS NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE DIRECTION OF INITIAL FLT. I BELIEVE THERE WERE SEVERAL CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS SIT: 1) MY UNFAMILIARITY WITH BZN. I RELIED ON THE CAPT TO PROVIDE INFO RELEVANT TO OPS IN THIS AREA. 2) WE FLEW A TRIP TO BZN 3 DAYS PRIOR, AND UPON OUR DEP OFF RWY 12, HAD BEEN GIVEN RWY HDG (CONTRARY TO THE TKOF AND OBSTACLE DEP PROC ON BACK OF THE COMPANY PROC).

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.