Narrative:

The following describes a mis-executed unpublished departure procedure at smo. Although separation was not lost with another aircraft; I feel this mistake would not have occurred had smo had a published SID. Upon receiving our IFR clearance from smo to sfo for a repositioning flight; I had great difficulty understanding the ground controller. He had to repeat various parts of the clearance at least 3 times before I could read it back correctly. (I have never had this much difficulty before when receiving a clearance.) even after the third try; another controller had to step in and clarify that 'victor VOR (my readback)' was; in fact; 'big sur.' admittedly; I am not very familiar with the airspace on the west coast; but was going to confirm our routing with the appropriate charts before taxiing. Our clearance was to fly runway heading to the lax 310 degree radial; then make a 'sharp' or 'quick' right turn to a 265 degree heading for radar vectors to ventura. The rest of the clearance followed. I briefed the captain; who did not hear the original clearance. I explained the difficulty I had experienced; and we agreed that since the lax radial would be crossed soon after takeoff; we would quickly turn to a 265 degree heading and intercept the radial. This was clearly not correct. I thought that maybe I should reconfirm our clearance during our taxi; but before I could; the ground controller asked us to 'speed up' our taxi; and 'contact tower' because 'they are waiting for you.' this was a bit strange. We monitored the tower while taxiing (we still had a couple thousand feet to taxi) and completed our taxi checklist. Tower immediately called and cleared us for takeoff; again repeating that 'they are waiting for you.' ('they' presumably was socal departure.) since we had completed our taxi checklist; we accepted the takeoff clearance and executed the departure as we had (incorrectly) understood it. The handoff to departure took quite a while; and when I asked the tower if they wanted us to switch; they told me to contact departure. When I contacted departure; the controller informed us that we had 'misunderstood' the departure procedure (his words); but that no traffic separation was lost. I believe that smo should have a published departure procedure. If there had been one; we would not have made this mistake. In addition; I could have studied the charts and possible routings before calling for clearance. I could have also asked the controller to slow his speech to make the clearance easier to understand. Finally; we should not have allowed the controllers to rush us. I felt rushed but did not speak up. All these actions contributed to what may have been a completely different outcome.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FALCON 900 FLT CREW HAS A TRACK AND HDG DEV DURING THE DEP FROM SMO.

Narrative: THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBES A MIS-EXECUTED UNPUBLISHED DEP PROC AT SMO. ALTHOUGH SEPARATION WAS NOT LOST WITH ANOTHER ACFT; I FEEL THIS MISTAKE WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED HAD SMO HAD A PUBLISHED SID. UPON RECEIVING OUR IFR CLRNC FROM SMO TO SFO FOR A REPOSITIONING FLT; I HAD GREAT DIFFICULTY UNDERSTANDING THE GND CTLR. HE HAD TO REPEAT VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CLRNC AT LEAST 3 TIMES BEFORE I COULD READ IT BACK CORRECTLY. (I HAVE NEVER HAD THIS MUCH DIFFICULTY BEFORE WHEN RECEIVING A CLRNC.) EVEN AFTER THE THIRD TRY; ANOTHER CTLR HAD TO STEP IN AND CLARIFY THAT 'VICTOR VOR (MY READBACK)' WAS; IN FACT; 'BIG SUR.' ADMITTEDLY; I AM NOT VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AIRSPACE ON THE WEST COAST; BUT WAS GOING TO CONFIRM OUR ROUTING WITH THE APPROPRIATE CHARTS BEFORE TAXIING. OUR CLRNC WAS TO FLY RWY HDG TO THE LAX 310 DEG RADIAL; THEN MAKE A 'SHARP' OR 'QUICK' R TURN TO A 265 DEG HDG FOR RADAR VECTORS TO VENTURA. THE REST OF THE CLRNC FOLLOWED. I BRIEFED THE CAPT; WHO DID NOT HEAR THE ORIGINAL CLRNC. I EXPLAINED THE DIFFICULTY I HAD EXPERIENCED; AND WE AGREED THAT SINCE THE LAX RADIAL WOULD BE CROSSED SOON AFTER TKOF; WE WOULD QUICKLY TURN TO A 265 DEG HDG AND INTERCEPT THE RADIAL. THIS WAS CLRLY NOT CORRECT. I THOUGHT THAT MAYBE I SHOULD RECONFIRM OUR CLRNC DURING OUR TAXI; BUT BEFORE I COULD; THE GND CTLR ASKED US TO 'SPD UP' OUR TAXI; AND 'CONTACT TWR' BECAUSE 'THEY ARE WAITING FOR YOU.' THIS WAS A BIT STRANGE. WE MONITORED THE TWR WHILE TAXIING (WE STILL HAD A COUPLE THOUSAND FEET TO TAXI) AND COMPLETED OUR TAXI CHKLIST. TWR IMMEDIATELY CALLED AND CLRED US FOR TKOF; AGAIN REPEATING THAT 'THEY ARE WAITING FOR YOU.' ('THEY' PRESUMABLY WAS SOCAL DEP.) SINCE WE HAD COMPLETED OUR TAXI CHKLIST; WE ACCEPTED THE TKOF CLRNC AND EXECUTED THE DEP AS WE HAD (INCORRECTLY) UNDERSTOOD IT. THE HDOF TO DEP TOOK QUITE A WHILE; AND WHEN I ASKED THE TWR IF THEY WANTED US TO SWITCH; THEY TOLD ME TO CONTACT DEP. WHEN I CONTACTED DEP; THE CTLR INFORMED US THAT WE HAD 'MISUNDERSTOOD' THE DEP PROC (HIS WORDS); BUT THAT NO TFC SEPARATION WAS LOST. I BELIEVE THAT SMO SHOULD HAVE A PUBLISHED DEP PROC. IF THERE HAD BEEN ONE; WE WOULD NOT HAVE MADE THIS MISTAKE. IN ADDITION; I COULD HAVE STUDIED THE CHARTS AND POSSIBLE ROUTINGS BEFORE CALLING FOR CLRNC. I COULD HAVE ALSO ASKED THE CTLR TO SLOW HIS SPEECH TO MAKE THE CLRNC EASIER TO UNDERSTAND. FINALLY; WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE CTLRS TO RUSH US. I FELT RUSHED BUT DID NOT SPEAK UP. ALL THESE ACTIONS CONTRIBUTED TO WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OUTCOME.

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.