Narrative:

I was the captain and PF for a flight out of scottsdale. Our clearance was the banyo 4 departure. This SID was programmed into both FMS's and briefed as published on the SID with the filed transition after banyo intersection. A normal departure and climb was made following the FMS and written depiction of the SID. While on the 300 degree heading per the departure; ATC stated for us to turn to 320 degree heading; intercept the pxr 321 degree radial; resume the departure. I selected navigation on the flight guidance panel to intercept the departure. Approximately 5 NM outside the banyo intersection; ATC queried our route. The PNF stated that we were flying the departure per the FMS to banyo intersection. We were given an immediate left turn away from the course to banyo and told we were flying the 'lost communication' departure procedure. At that point we realized that our clearance given after departing sdl was not the clearance programmed in the FMS and what was issued on the ground at sdl. We stated to ATC that this was confusing. They replied that this deviation happens very frequently and for us to work on getting the departure procedure changed by voicing our concerns. We should have verified the issued radial off of pxr on departure against the FMS instead of solely relying on the FMS giving us the correct information. In addition; phx departure ATC; knowing that this procedure is confusing and causes problems; should ensure that the pilot understands the new clearance instead of flying the published departure procedure. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the flight crew misunderstood the clearance to turn to a heading and intercept the radial. They thought the controller issued the clearance to continue on the published departure and they selected LNAV. This turned the aircraft to the next waypoint (banyo). He stated that with the FMC/glass cockpit and the automation involved in the new generation aircraft; that any change to the procedure can cause confusion. This analyst has recently flown this departure and controllers will issue headings to intercept on a regular basis. The flight crews 'must' listen to the controller's instructions.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CITATION CE750 FLT CREW HAS A HDG COURSE DEV WHILE DEPARTING SDL ON THE BANYO 4 DEP.

Narrative: I WAS THE CAPT AND PF FOR A FLT OUT OF SCOTTSDALE. OUR CLRNC WAS THE BANYO 4 DEP. THIS SID WAS PROGRAMMED INTO BOTH FMS'S AND BRIEFED AS PUBLISHED ON THE SID WITH THE FILED TRANSITION AFTER BANYO INTXN. A NORMAL DEP AND CLB WAS MADE FOLLOWING THE FMS AND WRITTEN DEPICTION OF THE SID. WHILE ON THE 300 DEG HDG PER THE DEP; ATC STATED FOR US TO TURN TO 320 DEG HDG; INTERCEPT THE PXR 321 DEG RADIAL; RESUME THE DEP. I SELECTED NAV ON THE FLT GUIDANCE PANEL TO INTERCEPT THE DEP. APPROX 5 NM OUTSIDE THE BANYO INTXN; ATC QUERIED OUR RTE. THE PNF STATED THAT WE WERE FLYING THE DEP PER THE FMS TO BANYO INTXN. WE WERE GIVEN AN IMMEDIATE L TURN AWAY FROM THE COURSE TO BANYO AND TOLD WE WERE FLYING THE 'LOST COM' DEP PROC. AT THAT POINT WE REALIZED THAT OUR CLRNC GIVEN AFTER DEPARTING SDL WAS NOT THE CLRNC PROGRAMMED IN THE FMS AND WHAT WAS ISSUED ON THE GND AT SDL. WE STATED TO ATC THAT THIS WAS CONFUSING. THEY REPLIED THAT THIS DEV HAPPENS VERY FREQUENTLY AND FOR US TO WORK ON GETTING THE DEP PROC CHANGED BY VOICING OUR CONCERNS. WE SHOULD HAVE VERIFIED THE ISSUED RADIAL OFF OF PXR ON DEP AGAINST THE FMS INSTEAD OF SOLELY RELYING ON THE FMS GIVING US THE CORRECT INFO. IN ADDITION; PHX DEP ATC; KNOWING THAT THIS PROC IS CONFUSING AND CAUSES PROBS; SHOULD ENSURE THAT THE PLT UNDERSTANDS THE NEW CLRNC INSTEAD OF FLYING THE PUBLISHED DEP PROC. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE FLT CREW MISUNDERSTOOD THE CLRNC TO TURN TO A HDG AND INTERCEPT THE RADIAL. THEY THOUGHT THE CTLR ISSUED THE CLRNC TO CONTINUE ON THE PUBLISHED DEP AND THEY SELECTED LNAV. THIS TURNED THE ACFT TO THE NEXT WAYPOINT (BANYO). HE STATED THAT WITH THE FMC/GLASS COCKPIT AND THE AUTOMATION INVOLVED IN THE NEW GENERATION ACFT; THAT ANY CHANGE TO THE PROC CAN CAUSE CONFUSION. THIS ANALYST HAS RECENTLY FLOWN THIS DEP AND CTLRS WILL ISSUE HDGS TO INTERCEPT ON A REGULAR BASIS. THE FLT CREWS 'MUST' LISTEN TO THE CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS.

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.