B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Aircraft Automation Overrode Flight Crew; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Aircraft; Chart Or Publication
We were cleared the ILKUP Departure with the KOKRU Transition. During the preflight route/FMS review; we noted the departure note 1 mandates runway heading until 2;000 FT; but the FMC is programmed for an immediate turn back to MNS. Because of this discrepancy; I briefed and flew a departure in runway heading/heading select with a manual turn after 2;000 FT to comply with the restriction (we were eventually cleared a left turn direct ILKUP). Also; there are two ground tracks depicted; one which proceeds back to MNS and one which directs a ground track of 280 degrees to intercept the 330 degree radial to ILKUP. However; the narrative does not differentiate. The departure procedure needs to be clarified to specify which ground track to fly and the FMS needs to then be programmed accordingly. In the interim; a note to flight crews should be placed on the flight plan from SBEG clarifying the procedure to follow.
The Reporter stated that he has not received clarification about the departure's track ambiguities. However; his other main concern was his aircraft's FMS directed an immediate left turn prior to the 2;000 FT constraint. He believes that immediate turn is a FMS programming error. Because the departure was manually flown he is uncertain what track the FMS would have directed the aircraft to follow had the automation remain engaged.
A B737 departed on the SBEG ILKUP SID; KOKRU Transition; but the 2;000 FT turn constraint was not in the FMS departure programming and additionally chart ambiguity does not specify which departure track to follow after an eastbound takeoff.