Narrative:

Aircraft X flight from las vegas to san francisco. Filed SID was idale 2 oal, revised to idale 2, bikkr oal before departure. First officer was flying and upon arriving at idale, turned towards bikkr. Controller called up and said it appeared we were heading to bikkr and we should be proceeding to shead on a bikkr transition. He gave us a heading and cleared us direct to shead when able. I reprogrammed the computer and we proceeded direct to shead. Controller questioned were we cleared the bikkr transition. I replied, revised to bikkr oal. Controller issued supervisor phone number and asked I call in sfo. I called las and talked on arrival in sfo. My first officer programmed the flight computer with the revised routing excluding the point shead. I checked the routes page and saw bikkr, but did not check the legs page. My discussion with supervisor revealed that the original filed route of las idale 2, oal, MOD2 sfo is the exact same route as the revised las idale 2 bikkr, oal, MOD2 sfo. My first officer read the revised route as the ATC intention to drop shead from the route which he did. Supervisor said there was no traffic conflict and that he was logging this as a deviation from an RNAV SID. Supervisor indicated no violation filing. Supervisor also indicated that we were the only airline having a problem with this SID revision. Possibly, our pilots see the revised segment as ATC intention to fly something different than the filed route when in fact nothing different is wanted.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 FLT CREW LOADS INCORRECT DEP INTO FMC AND HAS A TRACK HEADING DEV ON DEP FROM LAS.

Narrative: ACFT X FLT FROM LAS VEGAS TO SAN FRANCISCO. FILED SID WAS IDALE 2 OAL, REVISED TO IDALE 2, BIKKR OAL BEFORE DEP. FO WAS FLYING AND UPON ARRIVING AT IDALE, TURNED TOWARDS BIKKR. CTLR CALLED UP AND SAID IT APPEARED WE WERE HEADING TO BIKKR AND WE SHOULD BE PROCEEDING TO SHEAD ON A BIKKR TRANSITION. HE GAVE US A HEADING AND CLRED US DIRECT TO SHEAD WHEN ABLE. I REPROGRAMMED THE COMPUTER AND WE PROCEEDED DIRECT TO SHEAD. CTLR QUESTIONED WERE WE CLRED THE BIKKR TRANSITION. I REPLIED, REVISED TO BIKKR OAL. CTLR ISSUED SUPVR PHONE NUMBER AND ASKED I CALL IN SFO. I CALLED LAS AND TALKED ON ARR IN SFO. MY FO PROGRAMMED THE FLT COMPUTER WITH THE REVISED ROUTING EXCLUDING THE POINT SHEAD. I CHKED THE ROUTES PAGE AND SAW BIKKR, BUT DID NOT CHK THE LEGS PAGE. MY DISCUSSION WITH SUPVR REVEALED THAT THE ORIGINAL FILED RTE OF LAS IDALE 2, OAL, MOD2 SFO IS THE EXACT SAME RTE AS THE REVISED LAS IDALE 2 BIKKR, OAL, MOD2 SFO. MY FO READ THE REVISED RTE AS THE ATC INTENTION TO DROP SHEAD FROM THE RTE WHICH HE DID. SUPVR SAID THERE WAS NO TFC CONFLICT AND THAT HE WAS LOGGING THIS AS A DEV FROM AN RNAV SID. SUPVR INDICATED NO VIOLATION FILING. SUPVR ALSO INDICATED THAT WE WERE THE ONLY AIRLINE HAVING A PROB WITH THIS SID REVISION. POSSIBLY, OUR PLTS SEE THE REVISED SEGMENT AS ATC INTENTION TO FLY SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE FILED RTE WHEN IN FACT NOTHING DIFFERENT IS WANTED.

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.