Narrative:

I was acting as the pilot not flying on a part 91 flight in our corporate jet.we departed teb on the ruudy 4 RNAV departure. The departure was properly set in our dual FMS system. Both myself and the pilot flying verified the information was correct prior to takeoff. The SID requires a 240 degree heading to join a 260 degree course to the wentz intersection and level off at an altitude of 1;500 ft. Shortly after climb out; we had joined the 260 degree course and were then handed off to the new york departure controller.I completed the after takeoff checklist and noticed we were on course to tasca intersection as indicated on my mfd at which time I selected 2;000 ft on the altitude pre select. I verified the pilots information was indicating that tasca as our next fix. I then contacted new york departure and reported climbing through 1;600 ft for 2;000 ft. The controller advised that we needed to be at 1;500 ft as per the departure procedure. I then advised we were correcting and selected the altitude preselect to 1;500 ft and the pilot flying immediately disengaged the auto pilot and within seconds we descended from 1;800 ft back to 1;500 ft. I then selected 'direct to' wentz intersection on both FMS systems and realized we were still 1.6 miles from the wentz intersection. We crossed wentz at 1;500 ft and then selected and climbed to 2;000 ft and crossed tasca. The controller mentioned traffic was off to our left which we had no visual contact with. I did verify the traffic on TCAS but there was no conflict and no evasive maneuvering was required.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Learjet 45 flight crew flying the RUUDY RNAV SID from TEB climbed above the mandatory 1;500 FT MSL restriction prior to passing WENTZ. The pilot flying had noted TASCA as their 'next' fix and unilaterally selected its 2;000 FT MSL crossing restriction in the altitude select window. When alerted by ATC the PF realized they were still 1.6 NM from WENTZ which was still the active waypoint. Worth noting in the individual narratives is the conflict as to which pilot performed which actions.

Narrative: I was acting as the pilot not flying on a Part 91 flight in our corporate jet.We departed TEB on the RUUDY 4 RNAV Departure. The departure was properly set in our dual FMS system. Both myself and the pilot flying verified the information was correct prior to takeoff. The SID requires a 240 degree heading to join a 260 degree course to the WENTZ intersection and level off at an altitude of 1;500 FT. Shortly after climb out; we had joined the 260 degree course and were then handed off to the New York Departure Controller.I completed the after takeoff checklist and noticed we were on course to TASCA intersection as indicated on my MFD at which time I selected 2;000 FT on the altitude pre select. I verified the pilots information was indicating that TASCA as our next fix. I then contacted New York Departure and reported climbing through 1;600 FT for 2;000 FT. The Controller advised that we needed to be at 1;500 FT as per the departure procedure. I then advised we were correcting and selected the altitude preselect to 1;500 FT and the pilot flying immediately disengaged the auto pilot and within seconds we descended from 1;800 FT back to 1;500 FT. I then selected 'direct to' WENTZ Intersection on both FMS systems and realized we were still 1.6 miles from the WENTZ intersection. We crossed WENTZ at 1;500 FT and then selected and climbed to 2;000 FT and crossed TASCA. The Controller mentioned traffic was off to our left which we had no visual contact with. I did verify the traffic on TCAS but there was no conflict and no evasive maneuvering was required.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.