Narrative:

Flying a charted STAR (walda 5 microphone) (wld 5M) into munich; germany (eddm). STAR includes a note to expect GPS/FMS/RNAV transition or radar vectoring to ILS final; commencing at rokil intersection. We were cleared for the RNAV transition. I selected the ILS approach to runway 26; rokil transition; rather than the rokil FMS/RNAV transition; from the FMS database. Both commence from rokil; but follow different tracks outbound. Radar controller called us within a few mi of flying incorrect track; and then put us on radar vectors to the ILS final. There was no mention or evidence on TCAS of any conflict with any traffic. In retrospect; the controller instructions were clear; but with the RNAV/FMS transition having the same name as an ILS approach transition to the runway in use; it was an easy mistake to make. Supplemental information from acn 686579: captain briefed the approach and arrival to muc. He briefed the rokil arrival (10-2 page) and the transition through miq to the ILS runway 26R. Shortly thereafter; we received clearance from muc approach for the 'rokil transition.' this was interpreted by us as a confirmation of the rokil arrival on the 10-2 page. However; we believe that ATC desired us to fly the 'rokil transition;' an RNAV transition on the 10-2C page. On the 10-2 page (what we thought was our clearance); the initial turn after rokil is to the left; to miq. Miq is the published approach transition (IAF) to runway 26R. On the 10-2C page (what we think ATC actually wanted or expected us to fly); the fix after rokil is an RNAV waypoint -- a turn to the right.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B767 FLT CREW MISUNDERSTANDS THE CLRNC ISSUED AND LOADS WRONG ARR INTO THE FMS. THE CTLR NOTICES THE ACFT TRACK AND ISSUES A VECTOR-CLRNC.

Narrative: FLYING A CHARTED STAR (WALDA 5 MIKE) (WLD 5M) INTO MUNICH; GERMANY (EDDM). STAR INCLUDES A NOTE TO EXPECT GPS/FMS/RNAV TRANSITION OR RADAR VECTORING TO ILS FINAL; COMMENCING AT ROKIL INTXN. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE RNAV TRANSITION. I SELECTED THE ILS APCH TO RWY 26; ROKIL TRANSITION; RATHER THAN THE ROKIL FMS/RNAV TRANSITION; FROM THE FMS DATABASE. BOTH COMMENCE FROM ROKIL; BUT FOLLOW DIFFERENT TRACKS OUTBOUND. RADAR CTLR CALLED US WITHIN A FEW MI OF FLYING INCORRECT TRACK; AND THEN PUT US ON RADAR VECTORS TO THE ILS FINAL. THERE WAS NO MENTION OR EVIDENCE ON TCAS OF ANY CONFLICT WITH ANY TFC. IN RETROSPECT; THE CTLR INSTRUCTIONS WERE CLR; BUT WITH THE RNAV/FMS TRANSITION HAVING THE SAME NAME AS AN ILS APCH TRANSITION TO THE RWY IN USE; IT WAS AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 686579: CAPT BRIEFED THE APCH AND ARR TO MUC. HE BRIEFED THE ROKIL ARR (10-2 PAGE) AND THE TRANSITION THROUGH MIQ TO THE ILS RWY 26R. SHORTLY THEREAFTER; WE RECEIVED CLRNC FROM MUC APCH FOR THE 'ROKIL TRANSITION.' THIS WAS INTERPED BY US AS A CONFIRMATION OF THE ROKIL ARR ON THE 10-2 PAGE. HOWEVER; WE BELIEVE THAT ATC DESIRED US TO FLY THE 'ROKIL TRANSITION;' AN RNAV TRANSITION ON THE 10-2C PAGE. ON THE 10-2 PAGE (WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS OUR CLRNC); THE INITIAL TURN AFTER ROKIL IS TO THE L; TO MIQ. MIQ IS THE PUBLISHED APCH TRANSITION (IAF) TO RWY 26R. ON THE 10-2C PAGE (WHAT WE THINK ATC ACTUALLY WANTED OR EXPECTED US TO FLY); THE FIX AFTER ROKIL IS AN RNAV WAYPOINT -- A TURN TO THE R.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.