Narrative:

We departed out of ege using the cottonwood two departure procedure. The ceiling and visibility at ege was well above minimums. We were originally given the gypsum five departure but determined that the minimum climb gradient needed could not be achieved via our FMS. Based on running our performance numbers earlier in the day using our flight planning website account; we determined we could make our climb gradient using the 25dp2 departure procedure (cottonwood two departure). We advised ATC that we would like to fly the cottonwood two departure procedure and they gave us an amended clearance to fly the cottonwood two departure. Upon departure off of runway 25 at ege; we proceeded to fly this departure and were advised around ralpe that this procedure was to be used for emergency engine out procedures only. We told the controller that we were flying the procedure as published (the apg procedure we printed off of the flight planning website). He asked us to read the departure procedure to him that we had; which we did. He said; 'isn't there something in this procedure that states to fly only in an engine out emergency?' we stated that there is nothing in this procedure we had that stated this. The controller mentioned that this has been somewhat of an ongoing issue out of ege. We called denver center once we landed and were advised that they were having numerous aircraft deviating on this departure and were trying to get to the bottom of what might be going on. Denver center is very concerned with the aircraft that have flown this cottonwood two departure inadvertently just as we had. This puts the aircraft headed directly into ase's airspace and then this becomes a collision hazard. We told them we would call the flight planning service and follow up with any information we received. In talking to denver center further; we discovered that operators that are flying this procedure need to be certified to do so; which we were not aware of at the time. The procedure we had printed was from the performance data section of the flight planning website; and this procedure made no mention of one engine inoperative operations or pilot authorization required for use. In further research; we determined that a section of the website does state that the cottonwood two departure is to be used with one engine inoperative only. The performance data section needs to be modified to relay this information to pilots as well.the flight planning service [advised that they] had the intention to add the statement; 'these procedures describe the non-standard; one engine inoperative; departure flight path' into the performance data pages as well. He stated that they were looking into adding this statement and possibly additional clarification to the procedure as the flight planning service coordinate and decide exactly how to word the changes; however; the change is not a fast process and can take up to several months to complete. Denver center has requested a copy of any changes made via the flight planning service.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Corporate jet pilot reported that they were informed by ATC that the route they took on the Cottonwood Two Departure out of EGE was for emergency; engine out procedure only. The pilot advised that there was no such notation on the chart downloaded from a commercial flight planning website.

Narrative: We departed out of EGE using the Cottonwood Two Departure procedure. The ceiling and visibility at EGE was well above minimums. We were originally given the GYPSUM FIVE DEPARTURE but determined that the minimum climb gradient needed could not be achieved via our FMS. Based on running our performance numbers earlier in the day using our flight planning website account; we determined we could make our climb gradient using the 25DP2 Departure Procedure (Cottonwood Two Departure). We advised ATC that we would like to fly the Cottonwood Two Departure procedure and they gave us an amended clearance to fly the Cottonwood Two Departure. Upon departure off of Runway 25 at EGE; we proceeded to fly this departure and were advised around RALPE that this procedure was to be used for emergency engine out procedures only. We told the controller that we were flying the procedure as published (The APG procedure we printed off of the flight planning website). He asked us to read the departure procedure to him that we had; which we did. He said; 'Isn't there something in this procedure that states to fly only in an engine out emergency?' We stated that there is nothing in this procedure we had that stated this. The Controller mentioned that this has been somewhat of an ongoing issue out of EGE. We called Denver Center once we landed and were advised that they were having numerous aircraft deviating on this departure and were trying to get to the bottom of what might be going on. Denver Center is very concerned with the aircraft that have flown this Cottonwood Two Departure inadvertently just as we had. This puts the aircraft headed directly into ASE's airspace and then this becomes a collision hazard. We told them we would call the flight planning service and follow up with any information we received. In talking to Denver Center further; we discovered that operators that are flying this procedure need to be certified to do so; which we were not aware of at the time. The procedure we had printed was from the Performance Data section of the flight planning website; and this procedure made no mention of one engine inoperative operations or pilot authorization required for use. In further research; we determined that a section of the website does state that the Cottonwood Two Departure is to be used with one engine inoperative only. The Performance Data section needs to be modified to relay this information to pilots as well.The flight planning service [advised that they] had the intention to add the statement; 'These procedures describe the non-standard; one engine inoperative; departure flight path' into the Performance data pages as well. He stated that they were looking into adding this statement and possibly additional clarification to the procedure as the flight planning service coordinate and decide exactly how to word the changes; however; the change is not a fast process and can take up to several months to complete. Denver Center has requested a copy of any changes made via the flight planning service.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.