Pilot of mdt is confused by the truck SID graphic depiction out of trk. Track deviation results.

Attributes
ACN	736394
Time
Date	200704
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	intersection : truck
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl single value : 18000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : charter
Make Model Name	Medium Transport Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude ground : maintenance
Route In Use	departure sid : truck 4 enroute airway : zoa.airway
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : charter
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : multi engine
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 160 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 1700
ASRS Report	735394
Person 2
Function	controller : local
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance controller : issued advisory
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Chart Or Publication Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	Company
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

We had to get our clearance from reno FSS as we were unable to establish 2-WAY communication with ZOA on the ground at trk. The clearance we were given (by telephone) was: the TRK2 departure; sqw; fra; J7; fim; SADEE6 to lax. When I reviewed the SID; I saw it had a solid; bold line from truck to fmg; and no line at all from truck to sqw. I interpreted this as meaning the SID ended at fmg; not truck. (I realized later that the solid; bold line depicts part of a victor airway; and is not actually part of the SID.) even interping the SID that way; I was not sure they really wanted me to go that far northeast to fmg before turning south to sqw. I wanted to clarify this; but rather than call back to FSS by phone and have to relay my question to center; I elected to wait until we were airborne and ask center directly. After establishing communications with ZOA; I asked the controller if they wanted me to go all the way to fmg before turning to sqw. The controller did not respond to my question. A min later; when we were just getting to truck waypoint; I called again; and again got no response. Less than a min later; when we were about 5 NM northeast of truck; I called center and asked for a radio check. The controller responded by asking me to confirm we were proceeding direct to sqw. I stated I was completing the departure procedure to fmg; but we would turn now if she wanted us direct to sqw. The controller stated that the clearance was to sqw. In the next sector; we were told we had a possible pilot deviation and given a phone number to call. There were no traffic conflicts. In fact; there were no TCAS targets within 20 NM of us. I think the depiction of part of a victor airway should be deleted from the TRK2 SID as it is not an integral part of the procedure. Also; truckee gets a lot of jet traffic; and I think an rco is definitely warranted. It is too hard to get clarification relaying through FSS by telephone.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF MDT IS CONFUSED BY THE TRUCK SID GRAPHIC DEPICTION OUT OF TRK. TRACK DEV RESULTS.

Narrative: WE HAD TO GET OUR CLRNC FROM RENO FSS AS WE WERE UNABLE TO ESTABLISH 2-WAY COM WITH ZOA ON THE GND AT TRK. THE CLRNC WE WERE GIVEN (BY TELEPHONE) WAS: THE TRK2 DEP; SQW; FRA; J7; FIM; SADEE6 TO LAX. WHEN I REVIEWED THE SID; I SAW IT HAD A SOLID; BOLD LINE FROM TRUCK TO FMG; AND NO LINE AT ALL FROM TRUCK TO SQW. I INTERPED THIS AS MEANING THE SID ENDED AT FMG; NOT TRUCK. (I REALIZED LATER THAT THE SOLID; BOLD LINE DEPICTS PART OF A VICTOR AIRWAY; AND IS NOT ACTUALLY PART OF THE SID.) EVEN INTERPING THE SID THAT WAY; I WAS NOT SURE THEY REALLY WANTED ME TO GO THAT FAR NE TO FMG BEFORE TURNING S TO SQW. I WANTED TO CLARIFY THIS; BUT RATHER THAN CALL BACK TO FSS BY PHONE AND HAVE TO RELAY MY QUESTION TO CTR; I ELECTED TO WAIT UNTIL WE WERE AIRBORNE AND ASK CTR DIRECTLY. AFTER ESTABLISHING COMS WITH ZOA; I ASKED THE CTLR IF THEY WANTED ME TO GO ALL THE WAY TO FMG BEFORE TURNING TO SQW. THE CTLR DID NOT RESPOND TO MY QUESTION. A MIN LATER; WHEN WE WERE JUST GETTING TO TRUCK WAYPOINT; I CALLED AGAIN; AND AGAIN GOT NO RESPONSE. LESS THAN A MIN LATER; WHEN WE WERE ABOUT 5 NM NE OF TRUCK; I CALLED CTR AND ASKED FOR A RADIO CHK. THE CTLR RESPONDED BY ASKING ME TO CONFIRM WE WERE PROCEEDING DIRECT TO SQW. I STATED I WAS COMPLETING THE DEP PROC TO FMG; BUT WE WOULD TURN NOW IF SHE WANTED US DIRECT TO SQW. THE CTLR STATED THAT THE CLRNC WAS TO SQW. IN THE NEXT SECTOR; WE WERE TOLD WE HAD A POSSIBLE PLTDEV AND GIVEN A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL. THERE WERE NO TFC CONFLICTS. IN FACT; THERE WERE NO TCAS TARGETS WITHIN 20 NM OF US. I THINK THE DEPICTION OF PART OF A VICTOR AIRWAY SHOULD BE DELETED FROM THE TRK2 SID AS IT IS NOT AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE PROC. ALSO; TRUCKEE GETS A LOT OF JET TFC; AND I THINK AN RCO IS DEFINITELY WARRANTED. IT IS TOO HARD TO GET CLARIFICATION RELAYING THROUGH FSS BY TELEPHONE.

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.