Narrative:

CRJ2; on IFR flight from cvg to msp; filed WHWTR4.cadiz; and points beyond. He checked in climbing to 6000 ft. I instructed him to fly the tower assigned heading and join the WHWTR4 departure (runway heading until intercepting the cvg 294 degree radial); climb to 13000 ft. He responded correctly. I noticed he had taken a 294 degree heading off the airport. When he was climbing through about 4500 ft; I said I showed him about 3 mi offset north of the departure; and asked him if he showed on the track; and he responded that he was. I turned him to a 270 degree heading to get him back toward the proper course. Workload was light; so I discussed what the FMS showed his route; and he confirmed it. The track he took put him in direct confliction with cvg inbounds on the tarne arrival. We discussed the situation and I advised him that this isn't the first time air carrier X aircraft have done this; and asked him to alert his operations to this situation; since the chance of head-to-head confliction with inbound traffic in medium or high controller workloads is increased. Again; this is not the first time air carrier X aircraft have done this; and through other discussions with cvg's primary users; air carrier Y and air carrier Z; they have said they get their data from the same place; so it must just be familiarity with the procedure. Air carrier X needs to be aware of this situation and check their FMS data to ensure they pick up the radial off the VOR; not the airport! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter indicated that he has not observed the problem recently and that he forwarded the information to both ATC management and to the air carrier reps.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CVG CTLR DESCRIBED ACR NAV ERROR ON DEP AND INDICATED THAT THIS ACR HAD PREVIOUSLY HAD THE SAME NAV PROB UTILIZING WAYPOINTS.

Narrative: CRJ2; ON IFR FLT FROM CVG TO MSP; FILED WHWTR4.CADIZ; AND POINTS BEYOND. HE CHKED IN CLBING TO 6000 FT. I INSTRUCTED HIM TO FLY THE TWR ASSIGNED HDG AND JOIN THE WHWTR4 DEP (RWY HDG UNTIL INTERCEPTING THE CVG 294 DEG RADIAL); CLB TO 13000 FT. HE RESPONDED CORRECTLY. I NOTICED HE HAD TAKEN A 294 DEG HDG OFF THE ARPT. WHEN HE WAS CLBING THROUGH ABOUT 4500 FT; I SAID I SHOWED HIM ABOUT 3 MI OFFSET N OF THE DEP; AND ASKED HIM IF HE SHOWED ON THE TRACK; AND HE RESPONDED THAT HE WAS. I TURNED HIM TO A 270 DEG HDG TO GET HIM BACK TOWARD THE PROPER COURSE. WORKLOAD WAS LIGHT; SO I DISCUSSED WHAT THE FMS SHOWED HIS RTE; AND HE CONFIRMED IT. THE TRACK HE TOOK PUT HIM IN DIRECT CONFLICTION WITH CVG INBOUNDS ON THE TARNE ARR. WE DISCUSSED THE SIT AND I ADVISED HIM THAT THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME ACR X ACFT HAVE DONE THIS; AND ASKED HIM TO ALERT HIS OPS TO THIS SIT; SINCE THE CHANCE OF HEAD-TO-HEAD CONFLICTION WITH INBOUND TFC IN MEDIUM OR HIGH CTLR WORKLOADS IS INCREASED. AGAIN; THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME ACR X ACFT HAVE DONE THIS; AND THROUGH OTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH CVG'S PRIMARY USERS; ACR Y AND ACR Z; THEY HAVE SAID THEY GET THEIR DATA FROM THE SAME PLACE; SO IT MUST JUST BE FAMILIARITY WITH THE PROC. ACR X NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF THIS SIT AND CHK THEIR FMS DATA TO ENSURE THEY PICK UP THE RADIAL OFF THE VOR; NOT THE ARPT! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH REPORTER REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE REPORTER INDICATED THAT HE HAS NOT OBSERVED THE PROB RECENTLY AND THAT HE FORWARDED THE INFO TO BOTH ATC MANAGEMENT AND TO THE ACR REPS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.