Narrative:

Enroute to jfk via the preferred routing which included the IGN8 arrival; center changed our routing a couple of times; eventually giving us pwl V-44 deena bdr dpk direct instead of the IGN8 arrival. Pilot not flying and I both heard 'geena' instead of deena and read that back and ATC acknowledged correct. Pilot not flying could not find geena while re-programming the FMS. ATC was contacted to verify the intersection and we were then given the correct spelling for deena and both FMS boxes were now correctly programmed. Somewhere nearing pwl; the runway and approach were selected from the FMS data base. Nearing pwl we got a TA on our TCAS for VFR traffic 400 ft below us and about 3 miles; just as the aircraft was turning to what I believed to be V-44 towards loves intersection. This TCAS alert distracted us for verifying the next waypoint. Shortly afterwards; ATC gave us a left turn to a heading of 150 degrees; and then questioned why we had turned to the southwest instead of the southeast. Looking at our FMS; it was now headed for a fix that was not on V-44 but may have been from the previous STAR; the IGN8.the numerous ATC changes for routing; headings; altitudes; and speeds; coupled with the congestion on the radio added to the work load for re-programming the FMS'; which; evidently; caused a waypoint insertion error. A better solution for ATC would have been to merely re-clear us via the PWL2 arrival which is almost identical to the route they gave us. You might say ATC set us up for failure. Thankfully; I don't believe there was ever a conflict with any other IFR traffic.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An F-900 Flight Crew misprogrammed a routing change from ATC and a track deviation; quickly resolved by ATC; ensued.

Narrative: Enroute to JFK via the preferred routing which included the IGN8 arrival; Center changed our routing a couple of times; eventually giving us PWL V-44 DEENA BDR DPK direct instead of the IGN8 arrival. Pilot Not Flying and I both heard 'GEENA' instead of DEENA and read that back and ATC acknowledged correct. Pilot Not Flying could not find GEENA while re-programming the FMS. ATC was contacted to verify the intersection and we were then given the correct spelling for DEENA and both FMS boxes were now correctly programmed. Somewhere nearing PWL; the runway and approach were selected from the FMS data base. Nearing PWL we got a TA on our TCAS for VFR traffic 400 FT below us and about 3 miles; just as the aircraft was turning to what I believed to be V-44 towards LOVES Intersection. This TCAS alert distracted us for verifying the next waypoint. Shortly afterwards; ATC gave us a left turn to a heading of 150 degrees; and then questioned why we had turned to the southwest instead of the southeast. Looking at our FMS; it was now headed for a fix that was not on V-44 but may have been from the previous STAR; the IGN8.The numerous ATC changes for routing; headings; altitudes; and speeds; coupled with the congestion on the radio added to the work load for re-programming the FMS'; which; evidently; caused a waypoint insertion error. A better solution for ATC would have been to merely re-clear us via the PWL2 arrival which is almost identical to the route they gave us. You might say ATC set us up for failure. Thankfully; I don't believe there was ever a conflict with any other IFR traffic.

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.