Airbus 310 flight crew has track and heading deviation during departure from lfpg.

Attributes
ACN	723635
Time
Date	200701
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : lfff.artcc
State Reference	FO
Altitude	msl single value : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A310
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	climbout : initial
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 90 flight time total : 12500 flight time type : 2500
ASRS Report	723635
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued advisory
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Aircraft Chart Or Publication Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

Departure stated that our airplane began a turn prematurely after PG264 (a mandatory flyover point and PG266) on the okasi 1B departure; runway 26R; lfpg. Maintenance had to reload database prior to departure. All data points were properly entered; verified in both primary and secondary flight plans. There was no error in data entry or performance error noted in the flight plan or aircraft 'navigating.' please note difference between commercial chart page X and initial climb page Y. Note: FMS database loads PG264 (hard point); PG266; PG289; dopap; odebu; okasi (page X). FMS will lead PG266. On page Y; initial climb plan view; there is an additional point; PG265. This is not in database. Should PG265 be in database? Should it be a 'hard point?' or; was controller mistaken? I do not expect anything to come of this. Controller advised that aircraft was turning prematurely after PG264; which is a mandatory flyover point and there was no problem there. From that point; the FMS would normally lead point PG266; the next point in the database; but controller thought it was turning early. We use commercial charts and procedures now. Could there be a problem in the charted points or in the database? When we came to the aircraft prior to departure; the FMS would not load. Maintenance had put a new database in prior to our arrival at the aircraft. They had to come out and upload the database again prior to departure. I do not think this is causal; but; a potential issue. Everything was thoroughly verified in the FMS prior to departure and briefed and verified during the event; no abnormalities were noted in either the data in the FMS or aircraft performance.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AIRBUS 310 FLT CREW HAS TRACK AND HDG DEV DURING DEP FROM LFPG.

Narrative: DEP STATED THAT OUR AIRPLANE BEGAN A TURN PREMATURELY AFTER PG264 (A MANDATORY FLYOVER POINT AND PG266) ON THE OKASI 1B DEP; RWY 26R; LFPG. MAINT HAD TO RELOAD DATABASE PRIOR TO DEP. ALL DATA POINTS WERE PROPERLY ENTERED; VERIFIED IN BOTH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY FLT PLANS. THERE WAS NO ERROR IN DATA ENTRY OR PERFORMANCE ERROR NOTED IN THE FLT PLAN OR ACFT 'NAVING.' PLEASE NOTE DIFFERENCE BTWN COMMERCIAL CHART PAGE X AND INITIAL CLB PAGE Y. NOTE: FMS DATABASE LOADS PG264 (HARD POINT); PG266; PG289; DOPAP; ODEBU; OKASI (PAGE X). FMS WILL LEAD PG266. ON PAGE Y; INITIAL CLB PLAN VIEW; THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL POINT; PG265. THIS IS NOT IN DATABASE. SHOULD PG265 BE IN DATABASE? SHOULD IT BE A 'HARD POINT?' OR; WAS CTLR MISTAKEN? I DO NOT EXPECT ANYTHING TO COME OF THIS. CTLR ADVISED THAT ACFT WAS TURNING PREMATURELY AFTER PG264; WHICH IS A MANDATORY FLYOVER POINT AND THERE WAS NO PROB THERE. FROM THAT POINT; THE FMS WOULD NORMALLY LEAD POINT PG266; THE NEXT POINT IN THE DATABASE; BUT CTLR THOUGHT IT WAS TURNING EARLY. WE USE COMMERCIAL CHARTS AND PROCS NOW. COULD THERE BE A PROB IN THE CHARTED POINTS OR IN THE DATABASE? WHEN WE CAME TO THE ACFT PRIOR TO DEP; THE FMS WOULD NOT LOAD. MAINT HAD PUT A NEW DATABASE IN PRIOR TO OUR ARR AT THE ACFT. THEY HAD TO COME OUT AND UPLOAD THE DATABASE AGAIN PRIOR TO DEP. I DO NOT THINK THIS IS CAUSAL; BUT; A POTENTIAL ISSUE. EVERYTHING WAS THOROUGHLY VERIFIED IN THE FMS PRIOR TO DEP AND BRIEFED AND VERIFIED DURING THE EVENT; NO ABNORMALITIES WERE NOTED IN EITHER THE DATA IN THE FMS OR ACFT PERFORMANCE.

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.