Narrative:

I am used to using commercially produced charts however; for this trip I did not have the coverage for the area that I was flying in. Consequently I purchased current government charts which I rarely use. On the NUEVO5 departure; out of oak; the description of the departure; combined with the visual presentation; is different from what I am used to seeing in the commercial chart format. I interpreted the departure procedure to be a left turn to 200 degrees leaving 3;000 ft to intercept the sau 168 radial. It turns out that the depiction of that is for lost com only. The written description is a little vague on the subject; at least I thought so; and it wasn't until later that I noticed in the front of the chart book that what I interpreted was really just for lost com and I should have just remained on runway heading. Because of my lack of familiarity with the government format; I made the turn to 200 degrees. However; I doubt the controller even realized that I had done that; and she never said anything to me about it; as I simultaneously requested direct to bsr VOR. Instead the controller issued me a heading of 260 degrees; as an initial vector heading; which I turned to. Since I had not been on the 200 degree heading for more than a few seconds my aircraft had not traveled far at all and probably didn't show much of a heading change on the controller's radar. I believe that commercially provided and the government charts should be standardized a little bit more so that either can be used without the fear of misinterpretation. Personally; I believe the commercial charts are much better organized and easier to read and interpret. In any case; it seems that there should be a better attempt at standardization of the two.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Bonanza pilot; unfamiliar with the government published version of the NUEVO DP from OAK; misinterpreted the Lost Com procedure on the graphic depiction as the initial departure procedure and turned prior to receiving a clearance to do so.

Narrative: I am used to using commercially produced charts however; for this trip I did not have the coverage for the area that I was flying in. Consequently I purchased current government charts which I rarely use. On the NUEVO5 departure; out of OAK; the description of the departure; combined with the visual presentation; is different from what I am used to seeing in the commercial chart format. I interpreted the departure procedure to be a left turn to 200 degrees leaving 3;000 FT to intercept the SAU 168 radial. It turns out that the depiction of that is for lost com only. The written description is a little vague on the subject; at least I thought so; and it wasn't until later that I noticed in the front of the chart book that what I interpreted was really just for lost com and I should have just remained on runway heading. Because of my lack of familiarity with the government format; I made the turn to 200 degrees. However; I doubt the Controller even realized that I had done that; and she never said anything to me about it; as I simultaneously requested direct to BSR VOR. Instead the Controller issued me a heading of 260 degrees; as an initial vector heading; which I turned to. Since I had not been on the 200 degree heading for more than a few seconds my aircraft had not traveled far at all and probably didn't show much of a heading change on the Controller's radar. I believe that commercially provided and the government charts should be standardized a little bit more so that either can be used without the fear of misinterpretation. Personally; I believe the commercial charts are much better organized and easier to read and interpret. In any case; it seems that there should be a better attempt at standardization of the two.

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.