A300
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Human Factors
On arrival into MIA landing 26R we were told to expect the RNAV 26R. We mistakenly edited the HILEY6 arrival with the instructions on the procedure that were listed in the Lost Comm Box for landing west operations. After waypoint HILEY we proceeded to HOXIL. After we turned to HOXIL; Approach Control asked us if he had given us a heading. We responded that he had not but we were following the landing west procedure. We said that we were incorrect and that crews often make this same mistake. He told us not to worry about it and cleared us direct to NAYIB for the RNAV 26R. We landed; taxied; and shutdown uneventfully.Fatigue was a big factor for us. This was the second leg of [a day that included] holding and heavy storms. Many planes were delayed inbound and or required to divert due to low fuel. The presentation of the arrival chart also added to our misinterpretation; as well as other prior crews apparently. This chart was especially confusing and counter intuitive during landing west ops in MIA. More careful review of the arrival and more effective awareness of our state of fatigue.
A300 Captain reported a track deviation on arrival into MIA. Chart design and fatigue were cited as contributing.