Narrative:

While climbing out of las on the oasys 2 departure, we were turning to intercept the las 211 degree radial and received a clearance to 'intercept the las 211 degree radial and expect radar vectors and a turn sbound from the next controller.' many times controllers will emphasize the initial routing on a SID and since we were in the process of intercepting the radial at the time of the clearance, we continued on the SID. The comment to expect vectors or a turn from the next controller made sense, since there were thunderstorms in the area. When we switched to the next controller, we were tracking the las 211 degree radial. At 15 DME, we started a turn toward gfs, per the SID. The controller asked our intentions and stated that we were to track the las 211 degree radial per our previous clearance. He then cleared us to proceed direct gfs, flight plan route. TCASII showed no traffic in our area. Upon reflection, the clearance from the departure controller had the misfortune of being interpreted 2 ways, his and ours. A more precise clearance 'intercept and continue to track outbound on the las 211 degree radial for radar vectors from the next controller' could help prevent such a mishap. The original clearance 'to expect vectors' contributed to my thinking that we were still on the SID. A clarification request from the flight crew could also help. It did not happen in our situation, unfortunately, probably due to the fact that we both interpreted the departure controller's clearance in the same manner and believed we were on course.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MIL FLC MISINTERPRETED THE CLRNC GIVEN BY THE DEP CTLR AND TURNED PER THE SID VERSUS FLYING THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL AS CLRED. SECOND DEP CTLR SAW THE ACFT TURN AND THEN GAVE THE MLG A CLRNC DIRECT TO GFS. NO OTHER ACFT INVOLVED.

Narrative: WHILE CLBING OUT OF LAS ON THE OASYS 2 DEP, WE WERE TURNING TO INTERCEPT THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL AND RECEIVED A CLRNC TO 'INTERCEPT THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL AND EXPECT RADAR VECTORS AND A TURN SBOUND FROM THE NEXT CTLR.' MANY TIMES CTLRS WILL EMPHASIZE THE INITIAL ROUTING ON A SID AND SINCE WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF INTERCEPTING THE RADIAL AT THE TIME OF THE CLRNC, WE CONTINUED ON THE SID. THE COMMENT TO EXPECT VECTORS OR A TURN FROM THE NEXT CTLR MADE SENSE, SINCE THERE WERE TSTMS IN THE AREA. WHEN WE SWITCHED TO THE NEXT CTLR, WE WERE TRACKING THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL. AT 15 DME, WE STARTED A TURN TOWARD GFS, PER THE SID. THE CTLR ASKED OUR INTENTIONS AND STATED THAT WE WERE TO TRACK THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL PER OUR PREVIOUS CLRNC. HE THEN CLRED US TO PROCEED DIRECT GFS, FLT PLAN RTE. TCASII SHOWED NO TFC IN OUR AREA. UPON REFLECTION, THE CLRNC FROM THE DEP CTLR HAD THE MISFORTUNE OF BEING INTERPRETED 2 WAYS, HIS AND OURS. A MORE PRECISE CLRNC 'INTERCEPT AND CONTINUE TO TRACK OUTBOUND ON THE LAS 211 DEG RADIAL FOR RADAR VECTORS FROM THE NEXT CTLR' COULD HELP PREVENT SUCH A MISHAP. THE ORIGINAL CLRNC 'TO EXPECT VECTORS' CONTRIBUTED TO MY THINKING THAT WE WERE STILL ON THE SID. A CLARIFICATION REQUEST FROM THE FLC COULD ALSO HELP. IT DID NOT HAPPEN IN OUR SIT, UNFORTUNATELY, PROBABLY DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE BOTH INTERPRETED THE DEP CTLR'S CLRNC IN THE SAME MANNER AND BELIEVED WE WERE ON COURSE.

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.