Using the autoroute, SGAS-SGES uses UM548 which lists ROLOK as an entry point. However, after selecting the ROLOK departure, Charts shows an error – “entry waypoint is expected for the airway UM548”.
Hi! Thanks for the feedback!
I think I see the issue. The SID “incorrectly” has the same exact identifier as its initial endpoint.
I say “incorrectly” because this is the case in real life. It is “incorrect” in the sense that it is a very unusual and unexpected way to name a procedure, for this very reason.
I will see if there is anything we can do about it. Thank you for the report!
Kind Regards,
Malte
I have confirmed that this is a known issue, there is currently one other case like this worldwide!
I have added your example to the list. This is not prioritized at the moment unfortunately given the very limited affected cases. There is no obvious solution to this issue, even official authorities would have trouble with this. But we’re keeping track of it!
Kind Regards,
Malte
Ok thanks for the update. The WT 787-10 had no problem with it.
That’s understandable since their code never has to deal with the route in simple text form.
How would you tell if the user meant to select ROLOK departure or the ROLOK waypoint here?
SGAS ROLOK UM548 ESDIM DCT SGES
Or, given only the following information from your flight planning tool, are there two identical waypoints or is there a procedure hiding in there?
SGAS ROLOK ROLOK UM548 ESDIM DCT SGES
Here’s where this edge case could potentially be solved by looking at the order. There are two instances of ROLOK, one being directly after the origin. Is it safe to assume that the first is a procedure and not a waypoint, given its placement in the route? Not sure 
The 787 has a lot more information than that. It already knows that one is a procedure and one is a waypoint from the get-go! This makes things a lot easier, as long as they don’t need to represent the route using simple text like in our case 