Narrative:

I was the operating captain and PF on the ferry flight of an A300-600 from the factory to louisville, ky. The crew consisted of myself and the first officer who is also a captain on the A300. Flight planning was nominal with a 2 hour departure delay. The first officer had to manually enter the company provided computer flight plan into the FMS and it was crosschecked by myself. The master flight plan, the plotting chart and the airep form were filled out in accordance with company procedures. Following the delay the flight departed. We were filed below the nat tracks because TCASII was not installed in the aircraft. 90 mins prior to the entry point, we requested and received our oceanic clearance by ACARS. When it was received, I read it aloud to the first officer and he wrote it on the master copy of the flight plan. I feel that 2 things at this juncture contributed to the gross navigation error. The oceanic clearance differed from the one that the company had filed. The location of the ACARS unit is at the rear of the center pedestal, so that both pilots must lean backward to read the display. The company is aware of this issue and it is being worked but has not been rectified yet. We acknowledged acceptance and receipt of the oceanic clearance via ACARS. At the time the first officer wrote the clearance down, he crosschecked the route against the route filed. In doing so, he and I erroneously thought the first 3 route points to be the same. In fact, only the second 2 points were identical. The first overwater point was different by 1 numeral. We then were given a handoff to HF for a SELCAL check. Several mins later, shannon called us via SELCAL and asked us to confirm the next reporting point. The first officer repeated the 51n020w coordinates that were on our original flight plan and in the FMS without rechking the oceanic clearance. We then proceeded to cross the point at 51n020w and made our subsequent position report. Shortly afterward, shannon came back with a new route clearance and advised us that we had crossed the wrong point and were guilty of a gross navigation error that would be reported. I feel that shannon could have advised us earlier that there was a discrepancy in the position report and the cleared oceanic routing. We have 3 HF conversations with them during approximately 20 mins where this situation could have been addressed and corrected. We only discovered the error for ourselves a mi or two prior to the 51n020w point at which time it was too late to alter course to go to 52n020w. This error was caused by my not paying close enough attention to the details of the oceanic clearance that was 1 digit different from our filed clearance. I deeply regret this error.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A300-600 FLC EXPERIENCES A GROSS NAV ERROR OFF IRELAND WHEN THE CREW DOES NOT NOTE A WAYPOINT CHANGE IN THEIR REVISED CLRNC FROM EGGX, FO.

Narrative: I WAS THE OPERATING CAPT AND PF ON THE FERRY FLT OF AN A300-600 FROM THE FACTORY TO LOUISVILLE, KY. THE CREW CONSISTED OF MYSELF AND THE FO WHO IS ALSO A CAPT ON THE A300. FLT PLANNING WAS NOMINAL WITH A 2 HR DEP DELAY. THE FO HAD TO MANUALLY ENTER THE COMPANY PROVIDED COMPUTER FLT PLAN INTO THE FMS AND IT WAS XCHKED BY MYSELF. THE MASTER FLT PLAN, THE PLOTTING CHART AND THE AIREP FORM WERE FILLED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMPANY PROCS. FOLLOWING THE DELAY THE FLT DEPARTED. WE WERE FILED BELOW THE NAT TRACKS BECAUSE TCASII WAS NOT INSTALLED IN THE ACFT. 90 MINS PRIOR TO THE ENTRY POINT, WE REQUESTED AND RECEIVED OUR OCEANIC CLRNC BY ACARS. WHEN IT WAS RECEIVED, I READ IT ALOUD TO THE FO AND HE WROTE IT ON THE MASTER COPY OF THE FLT PLAN. I FEEL THAT 2 THINGS AT THIS JUNCTURE CONTRIBUTED TO THE GROSS NAV ERROR. THE OCEANIC CLRNC DIFFERED FROM THE ONE THAT THE COMPANY HAD FILED. THE LOCATION OF THE ACARS UNIT IS AT THE REAR OF THE CTR PEDESTAL, SO THAT BOTH PLTS MUST LEAN BACKWARD TO READ THE DISPLAY. THE COMPANY IS AWARE OF THIS ISSUE AND IT IS BEING WORKED BUT HAS NOT BEEN RECTIFIED YET. WE ACKNOWLEDGED ACCEPTANCE AND RECEIPT OF THE OCEANIC CLRNC VIA ACARS. AT THE TIME THE FO WROTE THE CLRNC DOWN, HE XCHKED THE RTE AGAINST THE RTE FILED. IN DOING SO, HE AND I ERRONEOUSLY THOUGHT THE FIRST 3 RTE POINTS TO BE THE SAME. IN FACT, ONLY THE SECOND 2 POINTS WERE IDENTICAL. THE FIRST OVERWATER POINT WAS DIFFERENT BY 1 NUMERAL. WE THEN WERE GIVEN A HDOF TO HF FOR A SELCAL CHK. SEVERAL MINS LATER, SHANNON CALLED US VIA SELCAL AND ASKED US TO CONFIRM THE NEXT RPTING POINT. THE FO REPEATED THE 51N020W COORDINATES THAT WERE ON OUR ORIGINAL FLT PLAN AND IN THE FMS WITHOUT RECHKING THE OCEANIC CLRNC. WE THEN PROCEEDED TO CROSS THE POINT AT 51N020W AND MADE OUR SUBSEQUENT POS RPT. SHORTLY AFTERWARD, SHANNON CAME BACK WITH A NEW RTE CLRNC AND ADVISED US THAT WE HAD CROSSED THE WRONG POINT AND WERE GUILTY OF A GROSS NAV ERROR THAT WOULD BE RPTED. I FEEL THAT SHANNON COULD HAVE ADVISED US EARLIER THAT THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY IN THE POS RPT AND THE CLRED OCEANIC ROUTING. WE HAVE 3 HF CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM DURING APPROX 20 MINS WHERE THIS SIT COULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND CORRECTED. WE ONLY DISCOVERED THE ERROR FOR OURSELVES A MI OR TWO PRIOR TO THE 51N020W POINT AT WHICH TIME IT WAS TOO LATE TO ALTER COURSE TO GO TO 52N020W. THIS ERROR WAS CAUSED BY MY NOT PAYING CLOSE ENOUGH ATTN TO THE DETAILS OF THE OCEANIC CLRNC THAT WAS 1 DIGIT DIFFERENT FROM OUR FILED CLRNC. I DEEPLY REGRET THIS ERROR.

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.