Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Situational Awareness
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Human Factors; Procedure
A CRJ2 departed Runway 36C on the CRSON1 RNAV departure; which should be approximately a 010 heading for about 12 miles then a northeast turn. I observed the aircraft make a turn to the northwest approximately 1 mile off the departure end. I made sure Tower didn't have any conflicting departures and then coordinated with West Departure. I asked the aircraft which fix he was heading to. The pilot responded 'RNAV to CASLN' which is a northwest departure only used on the midnight shift. I told the CRJ2 that their flight plan was for CRSON and spelled it for him. The pilot stated that CRSON was not in their data base. I then gave the pilot a radial to join off of the Memphis VOR and coordinated with ZME. I believe that this would be easily avoidable by re-naming one of the two RNAV departures. They are very similar sounding and in spelling.
I cleared a CRJ2 for takeoff with the following phraseology: 'CRJ2 Runway 36C; RNAV to SLONN; cleared for takeoff.' The aircraft read back correctly. I observed the aircraft airborne off the departure end and switched him to Departure. I gave control instructions to other aircraft. When I scanned the departure corridor I noticed that the CRJ2 had turned to the northwest when he should have turned to the northeast. I alerted the Local Control 1 Controller that the aircraft had encroached into his airspace. At that time the Departure Controller called and queried the situation. I told him Local Control 1 had no conflicting traffic. The Departure Controller advised me that the aircraft stated he was RNAV to CASLN and did not have the transition fix CRSON (which was part of his filed flight plan) in his database. Tower needs to issue vectors to departures instead of allowing RNAV aircraft to fly up to two miles off the departure end while 'hunting for their next fix' on RNAV departures. If this aircraft was issued a vector; this potentially catastrophic situation never would have happened. We were fortunate that Local Control 1 did not have a simultaneous departure which is a frequent occurrence at this airport.
M03 Controller described a developing conflict invoving IFR departures assigned RNAV SIDS. The reporters indicated that both similar sounding fix names CRSON and CASLN as well as Controller awareness issues were causal factors.