Narrative:

Due to charting error, forpe intersection was omitted from the SJN3 departure. That should not be a problem, except that apparently during the charting/update process, certain aircraft and certain airlines there is an apparent error in their database. Specifically, FMS or '/east' aircraft, when they intercept the 054 degree radial the aircraft is actually 4 mi south of the 054 degree radial. Also, on east departure flow, these same aircraft fly heading 090 degrees at 4 mi DME east of pxr to intercept the 054 degree radial. The procedure calls for a 045 degree heading radial to intercept the 054 degree radial. This is a major safety issue, especially if next departure is a chezz departure SID. The aircraft turning to a 090 degree heading turning directly into the following aircraft. I don't see how omitting forpe intersection could cause such extensive problems, but there appears to be a lack of concern on management's part. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter advised that controllers and management have concurred on a resolution to the problem by ensuring greater controller awareness of the potential conflict problem until the st john SID can be corrected at the next charting date. Controller advised that management has addressed the controller observed FMS tracking errors with the effected air carrier, but was not aware of any interim resolution.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: P50 DEP CTLR CONCERNED WITH ST JOHN'S SID FIX CHARTING ERROR AND A PROB WITH FMS EQUIPPED ACFT FLYING FMS-RNAV-PHX SIDS IN ERROR APPARENTLY CAUSED BY INCORRECT DATABASE DEVELOPMENT.

Narrative: DUE TO CHARTING ERROR, FORPE INTXN WAS OMITTED FROM THE SJN3 DEP. THAT SHOULD NOT BE A PROB, EXCEPT THAT APPARENTLY DURING THE CHARTING/UPDATE PROCESS, CERTAIN ACFT AND CERTAIN AIRLINES THERE IS AN APPARENT ERROR IN THEIR DATABASE. SPECIFICALLY, FMS OR '/E' ACFT, WHEN THEY INTERCEPT THE 054 DEG RADIAL THE ACFT IS ACTUALLY 4 MI S OF THE 054 DEG RADIAL. ALSO, ON E DEP FLOW, THESE SAME ACFT FLY HEADING 090 DEGS AT 4 MI DME E OF PXR TO INTERCEPT THE 054 DEG RADIAL. THE PROC CALLS FOR A 045 DEG HDG RADIAL TO INTERCEPT THE 054 DEG RADIAL. THIS IS A MAJOR SAFETY ISSUE, ESPECIALLY IF NEXT DEP IS A CHEZZ DEP SID. THE ACFT TURNING TO A 090 DEG HDG TURNING DIRECTLY INTO THE FOLLOWING ACFT. I DON'T SEE HOW OMITTING FORPE INTXN COULD CAUSE SUCH EXTENSIVE PROBS, BUT THERE APPEARS TO BE A LACK OF CONCERN ON MGMNT'S PART. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ADVISED THAT CTLRS AND MGMNT HAVE CONCURRED ON A RESOLUTION TO THE PROB BY ENSURING GREATER CTLR AWARENESS OF THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT PROB UNTIL THE ST JOHN SID CAN BE CORRECTED AT THE NEXT CHARTING DATE. CTLR ADVISED THAT MGMNT HAS ADDRESSED THE CTLR OBSERVED FMS TRACKING ERRORS WITH THE EFFECTED ACR, BUT WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY INTERIM RESOLUTION.

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.