Gulfstream V / G500 / G550
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 67; Flight Crew Total 17682; Flight Crew Type 2642
Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Aircraft; Human Factors
Inadvertent Deviation from departure procedure. Crew loaded and reviewed the departure in the FMS after receiving the clearance. I was PIC and checked the points/headings/distances throughout the loaded flight plan. Verified everything looked correct on the plan view of the MFD. Crew briefed the Departure with the departure plate in front of them. The review included the initial headings; turns; and altitudes. We were cleared for take-off and preceded on the PEBLE 6 departure. I (PIC) followed the Command Bars; and SIC completed the climb checklist. About the time that I realized that we were climbing over the houses and should be heading on a more northerly heading we were given a heading of 290 (the command bars were still showing ~268).ATC asked us to call them when able on a landline. I called San Diego when we completed our 3 legs for the day and the controller asked me if we had a Honeywell box. Yes; we did. The controller said they have had many issues with this departure and the Honeywell FMS. I failed to see the 813 nm error on the initial climb segment from the departure end of the runway and [the FMS] directed me to fly considerably south of course!A combination of 1) database error 2) Lack of crew [awareness to] catch the error on initial verification process and 3) Lack of crew [awareness]to realize the heading error once airborne until we were off course were all contributing factors. As we rely on automation for navigation; it is imperative that we do not get complacent in our vigilance to confirm and re-confirm our position and situational awareness.
ATC [questioned our track] and we indicated we were following the flight director and had made adjustments for the adverse weather conditions. He then responded that other Honeywell Flight Management Systems had experienced difficulties with that transition. We were issued a heading and followed ATC instructions.The balance of the flight was normal operation conducted per our SOP.The key part here is that we followed the FMS cues in LNAV observing FD; blue RMI; and NAV page. The turning cues were a bit unstable moments prior to ATC call. Explanation of the scenario is that the FMS experienced sequencing issues and gave false turning cues possibly exacerbated by high winds.
ATC advised GV flight crew of a track deviation while flying the PEBLE 6 Departure out of SAN; and stated they have seen other Honeywell FMS-equipped aircraft experience similar track deviations.