Narrative:

For part of august, flts from cdr to bis were filed by flcs due to the change of scheduling and absence of new flight plans in the ATC system. I received clearance from ATC via FSS (columbia radio) as 'cleared to bismarck via V169' etc. Both the captain and myself assumed V169 was cdr-dpr-bis, like the flcs had been filing previously. Unfortunately, neither of us confirmed this verbally or by use of the charts. We departed cdr and requested a heading direct bis upon contacting ZDV. The controller responded by saying he was too busy at the moment and asked us to continue flying our filed route. We then flew a heading for dpr still thinking that was our routing. After a few moments, the controller asked us to confirm we were proceeding direct to rap. Our answer was 'negative, we're proceeding direct to dpr.' at this point, the controller became very angry and told us to be advised our routing was V169 which is cdr-rap-dpr-bis. The controller also stated any future deviations would not be tolerated. I see 2 ways in which this situation may be avoided in the future. One is to have our flcs check with operations as to the planned routings of new flts in case the flight crew must file them until they are put in the ATC system. The other preventive method is for the flight crew to confirm, either verbally or by use of charts, any unfamiliar route. The latter of these prevented an exact repeat of this incident 2 nights later while I was flying with a different captain. Supplemental information from acn 344977: the main contributing factor was each crew member's unfamiliarity of the area and assumption of what the correct clearance was.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR SMT FLEW WRONG RTE AFTER DEP CDR.

Narrative: FOR PART OF AUGUST, FLTS FROM CDR TO BIS WERE FILED BY FLCS DUE TO THE CHANGE OF SCHEDULING AND ABSENCE OF NEW FLT PLANS IN THE ATC SYS. I RECEIVED CLRNC FROM ATC VIA FSS (COLUMBIA RADIO) AS 'CLRED TO BISMARCK VIA V169' ETC. BOTH THE CAPT AND MYSELF ASSUMED V169 WAS CDR-DPR-BIS, LIKE THE FLCS HAD BEEN FILING PREVIOUSLY. UNFORTUNATELY, NEITHER OF US CONFIRMED THIS VERBALLY OR BY USE OF THE CHARTS. WE DEPARTED CDR AND REQUESTED A HDG DIRECT BIS UPON CONTACTING ZDV. THE CTLR RESPONDED BY SAYING HE WAS TOO BUSY AT THE MOMENT AND ASKED US TO CONTINUE FLYING OUR FILED RTE. WE THEN FLEW A HDG FOR DPR STILL THINKING THAT WAS OUR ROUTING. AFTER A FEW MOMENTS, THE CTLR ASKED US TO CONFIRM WE WERE PROCEEDING DIRECT TO RAP. OUR ANSWER WAS 'NEGATIVE, WE'RE PROCEEDING DIRECT TO DPR.' AT THIS POINT, THE CTLR BECAME VERY ANGRY AND TOLD US TO BE ADVISED OUR ROUTING WAS V169 WHICH IS CDR-RAP-DPR-BIS. THE CTLR ALSO STATED ANY FUTURE DEVS WOULD NOT BE TOLERATED. I SEE 2 WAYS IN WHICH THIS SIT MAY BE AVOIDED IN THE FUTURE. ONE IS TO HAVE OUR FLCS CHK WITH OPS AS TO THE PLANNED ROUTINGS OF NEW FLTS IN CASE THE FLC MUST FILE THEM UNTIL THEY ARE PUT IN THE ATC SYS. THE OTHER PREVENTIVE METHOD IS FOR THE FLC TO CONFIRM, EITHER VERBALLY OR BY USE OF CHARTS, ANY UNFAMILIAR RTE. THE LATTER OF THESE PREVENTED AN EXACT REPEAT OF THIS INCIDENT 2 NIGHTS LATER WHILE I WAS FLYING WITH A DIFFERENT CAPT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 344977: THE MAIN CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS EACH CREW MEMBER'S UNFAMILIARITY OF THE AREA AND ASSUMPTION OF WHAT THE CORRECT CLRNC WAS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.