Narrative:

I do not believe any deviation occurred from ATC instructions but rather a safety of flight issue occurred. Departure from 22L on the newark 7 SID calls for a vector to the col 350 radial. We set up for this with the FMS and raw data; so we were ready. On departure we contacted ny departure control and immediately were given instructions to turn to 220 and intercept the col 350 radial. This occurred as we were turning to the initial heading and waiting for the turn point to the 220 heading for the departure procedure. This communication came as we were configuring the aircraft for climb and accelerating at approx 1500 feet. Further the instructions were confusing. Did the controller want me to turn now or wait for the 220 heading via the departure procedure? I turned to the heading and the selected direct to col and the inbound course of 170. The aircraft turned immediately and the raw data confirmed that we were heading in the right direction and converging with the 350 radial inbound; but slightly left of course. Another frequency change and another instruction to fly heading 220 and inbound on the 350 radial. Again we selected the direct to col and inbound on the 170 course/350 radial. It is my belief that this departure procedure needs to reduce the frequency changes; altitude changes; and course changes at low altitudes. One way to do this is using a complete RNAV procedure to reduce all of the above. We were taken out of the flying focus to; 'what did she say;' or 'what did she mean.' it is a big distraction at this critical time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A320 Captain reports being confused by ATC instructions departing Runway 22L on the EWR 7 departure.

Narrative: I do not believe any deviation occurred from ATC instructions but rather a safety of flight issue occurred. Departure from 22L on the Newark 7 SID calls for a vector to the COL 350 radial. We set up for this with the FMS and raw data; so we were ready. On departure we contacted NY Departure Control and immediately were given instructions to turn to 220 and intercept the COL 350 radial. This occurred as we were turning to the initial heading and waiting for the turn point to the 220 heading for the departure procedure. This communication came as we were configuring the aircraft for climb and accelerating at approx 1500 feet. Further the instructions were confusing. Did the controller want me to turn now or wait for the 220 heading via the departure procedure? I turned to the heading and the selected direct to COL and the inbound course of 170. The aircraft turned immediately and the raw data confirmed that we were heading in the right direction and converging with the 350 radial inbound; but slightly left of course. Another frequency change and another instruction to fly heading 220 and inbound on the 350 radial. Again we selected the direct to COL and inbound on the 170 course/350 radial. It is my belief that this departure procedure needs to reduce the frequency changes; altitude changes; and course changes at low altitudes. One way to do this is using a complete RNAV procedure to reduce all of the above. We were taken out of the flying focus to; 'what did she say;' or 'what did she mean.' It is a big distraction at this critical time.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.