Narrative:

During the preflight phase I spoke to dispatch as I hadn't been to ZZZZ in a few years and I didn't recognize the alternate that was selected. I then located the correct charts for my alternate and destination. In cruise; like always; I requested our return flight information to review it and to pre-load into mcdu; operations; etc. As I entered the next flight plan into the mcdu I noticed that when I compared the aero charts; the flight plan and the mcdu that the departure #'s didn't match up. The mcdu appeared to have a more recent version of the SID than the flight plan and our aero charts. I contacted dispatch to question which one was correct. I was informed that we should have #2 on board and that it was effective 17 dec. I now concerned myself with what other ZZZZ charts might be updated that I don't have. I made a chart of each of the charts that I had and the effective date that I had. I then contacted dispatch to see what they had for each of the charts that I had on board. I asked not only for the effective date; but the 'changes' for each chart. I also asked for the changes and all of them unfortunately were 'procedure'. Therefore there was no way of knowing all that had changed within the procedure. As we finished; I was told that all of them were 17 dec except the VOR/DME runway 25 plate which was 10jul09. Thank goodness. I then requested that all ZZZZ charts be faxed to ZZZZ upon arrival. I also requested that ord; mke; ZZZZ1 be reviewed to make sure that I had the most current charts on board for those airports as well. Our plan was to utilize the current VOR/DME runway 25 chart and request that approach to the airport. Some time later we received an ACARS message stating; that another dispatcher stated that these charts are part of rev 26; not 25 and that it is effective next week. This made no sense to me as if the eff date was 17 dec; they would be in the current revision; not one dated in jan 2010. I was then told via ACARS that all ZZZZ charts had an eff date of 17Dec. As we now have no current charts to our destination our focus turned to whether or not we could safely land VMC into ZZZZ. We started our descent and unfortunately at about 5000' it became apparent that we would not be able to proceed VMC to the airport. We requested a climb and to proceed to our alternate. We were then told that ZZZZ1 was closed for the evening. It became very apparent to me that time was now getting critical to get to an airport with our fuel remaining. I asked to proceed to ZZZZ2 immediately. It took a few minutes for them to coordinate and then we proceeded up the coast to ZZZZ2. We landed safely in ZZZZ2 with 3.8 fob. The event occurred because we trust that the contractor that provides us the charts onboard the aircraft are current and accurate.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: The flight crew of an air carrier aircraft discover enroute that none of the on board aero charts for their destination are current. Decide to divert to another airport when they are unable to make a visual approach to their destination.

Narrative: During the preflight phase I spoke to dispatch as I hadn't been to ZZZZ in a few years and I didn't recognize the alternate that was selected. I then located the correct charts for my alternate and destination. In cruise; like always; I requested our return flight information to review it and to pre-load into MCDU; OPS; etc. As I entered the next flight plan into the MCDU I noticed that when I compared the aero charts; the flight plan and the MCDU that the departure #'s didn't match up. The MCDU appeared to have a more recent version of the SID than the flight plan and our aero charts. I contacted dispatch to question which one was correct. I was informed that we should have #2 on board and that it was effective 17 Dec. I now concerned myself with what other ZZZZ charts might be updated that I don't have. I made a chart of each of the charts that I had and the effective date that I had. I then contacted dispatch to see what they had for each of the charts that I had on board. I asked not only for the effective date; but the 'CHANGES' for each chart. I also asked for the changes and all of them unfortunately were 'procedure'. Therefore there was no way of knowing all that had changed within the procedure. As we finished; I was told that all of them were 17 Dec except the VOR/DME RWY 25 plate which was 10jul09. Thank goodness. I then requested that all ZZZZ charts be faxed to ZZZZ upon arrival. I also requested that ORD; MKE; ZZZZ1 be reviewed to make sure that I had the most current charts on board for those airports as well. Our plan was to utilize the current VOR/DME RWY 25 chart and request that approach to the airport. Some time later we received an ACARS message stating; that another dispatcher stated that these charts are part of REV 26; not 25 and that it is effective next week. This made no sense to me as if the EFF date was 17 Dec; they would be in the current revision; not one dated in Jan 2010. I was then told via ACARS that ALL ZZZZ charts had an EFF date of 17Dec. As we now have no current charts to our destination our focus turned to whether or not we could safely land VMC into ZZZZ. We started our descent and unfortunately at about 5000' it became apparent that we would not be able to proceed VMC to the airport. We requested a climb and to proceed to our alternate. We were then told that ZZZZ1 was closed for the evening. It became very apparent to me that time was now getting critical to get to an airport with our fuel remaining. I asked to proceed to ZZZZ2 immediately. It took a few minutes for them to coordinate and then we proceeded up the coast to ZZZZ2. We landed safely in ZZZZ2 with 3.8 FOB. The event occurred because we trust that the contractor that provides us the charts onboard the aircraft are current and accurate.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.