Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (mon) 6; Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 1
Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Workload
Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
I was training a Developmental on LC 1 at the time of the event. Training was also occurring on radar control at the time. The Developmental I was training cleared Aircraft X for takeoff on Runway 4.  Aircraft X had previously been issued the XEROX6 departure in their IFR clearance by Clearance Delivery.  The Developmental then instructed Aircraft Y to line up and wait on Runway 4.  As Aircraft X was airborne and had just crossed the departure end of Runway 4; the Developmental cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff.  I noted to the Developmental that this takeoff clearance was slightly early to achieve IFR radar separation and we discussed techniques to achieve separation once they were airborne.  Aircraft Y had also been issued the XEROX6 departure as part of their IFR clearance from Clearance Delivery.The Developmental then switched Aircraft X to ROC Departure Control.  Shortly after this I noted to the Developmental that Aircraft X deviated from the XEROX6 departure; which includes a left turn to 360 degrees after leaving 1;200 feet. MSL.  Aircraft X flew runway heading and did not execute the left turn to 360 degrees.Once Aircraft Y became airborne and a full radar data block acquired it was apparent we did not have IFR radar separation between Aircraft X and Aircraft Y. Further; Aircraft Y executed the left turn to 360 degrees on the XEROX6 departure; which essentially started to 'cut off' Aircraft X's flight path once they were turned by the Radar Controller. I also noted Aircraft Y was climbing faster than Aircraft X.  I instructed the Developmental to not switch Aircraft Y to Departure Control so we could provide tower-applied visual separation from Aircraft X until the radar controller turned Aircraft X to a heading that would provide diverging courses and sufficient IFR radar separation.I noted Aircraft X was turning to a northwest-bound heading while Aircraft Y was heading 360 degrees and instructed the Developmental to not switch Aircraft Y until Aircraft X was observed turning westbound and diverging away from Aircraft Y.I then keyed up to monitor the Radar Controller and heard the Radar Developmental turn Aircraft X back to a heading of 360 degrees.  After hearing this I became concerned and I then called the Radar Controller myself to coordinate a heading for Aircraft Y. The Radar Developmental replied 'Aircraft Y direct AIRCO.'  AIRCO was Aircraft Y's first flight plan fix and is approximately a 290 degree heading.  The Developmental I was training then instructed Aircraft Y to proceed direct AIRCO and contact Departure. This switch to Departure of Aircraft Y was before diverging courses had been established.I would make two recommendations to prevent this from happening in the future.First; I would take over the situation sooner and issue a heading to Aircraft Y and then coordinate it after the fact as soon as I had observed Aircraft X deviated from the XEROX6. I discussed with the Departure Controller who was training that both positions could have done a better job in coordinating this.Secondly; this deviation from the XEROX6 is a repeat and common occurrence by IFR aircraft departing Runway 4. The procedure for all other runways departing ROC on the XEROX6 is to fly runway heading. Runway 4 is the only runway that includes any sort of turn.  When trying to efficiently get multiple departing aircraft airborne by using near minimum IFR separation; if one aircraft does not execute the left turn to 360 degrees it creates a situation like this where the second aircraft cuts off the first aircraft's flight path.  This is a common occurrence at ROC that continues to happen again and again even after correcting pilots on their error and multiple changes over the years in the wording of the SID.The left turn procedure on the XEROX6 should be abolished in favor of aircraft flying runway heading when departing Runway 4; just as they do departing all other runways at ROC. Departing aircraft allflying the same heading would prevent this type of situation from happening that directly leads to the loss of IFR radar separation and the local or radar controller scrambling to separate two departing aircraft.
I was off the flight deck when the FO (First Officer) received the clearance from ATC.  Prior to giving the preflight briefing I ask him 'Are we cleared as filed?' and he answered 'Yes'.  He made no mention we had the XEROX6 departure.  The route on the release does not include the XEROX6 in the flight plan.  So I assumed we were radar vectors to the first fix. After takeoff the departure includes a turn to 360 which is not runway heading.  At approximately 1;000 feet. Departure gave us a heading to 330 initially then a heading of 360.  That's when he inquired if we were given the charted departure.  I asked the FO did he put in the departure and he said yes; however I checked the FMS and no departure was programmed. I confessed this to ATC. The controller did not mention that any pilot deviation had taken place.  The flight continued without any further incident. It appears that I'll either have to start taking the clearances myself or monitor the radio when clearances are issued.  Actually this is something I usually do but; in this instance was off flight deck for some reason.
ROC Tower Controller and a CRJ-700 flight crew reported problems with the XEROX6 departure which caused an airborne conflict.