Narrative:

Prior to block departure, the captain and I briefed the loupe six departure, including the crossing restrictions. After takeoff, while turning to 120 degree heading, bay departure cleared us to climb to 6000' (instead of 5000 published on the departure) until crossing the sjc 047 radial. While on the 120 heading, after crossing the sjc 047 radial, bay departure cleared us, 'pilot's discretion direct sjc VOR, comply with crossing restrictions, climb and maintain FL190, contact oakland center on (frequency).' while watching for VFR traffic (on a severe clear day in the bay area), I glanced at the SID chart, which shows the first fix (sjc 047 right) at or below 5000, sjc VOR at 12,000, and sjc 339R/8 DME at or above 14,000. I missed the at over sjc VOR and thought the restriction was at or above 12,000'. I had FL190 in mind since that was our cleared altitude and the first crossing restriction had already been cancelled and changed to 6000'. We crossed sjc VOR at about 13-14,000 and by that time, the captain was in contact with oakland center, who queried us about missing the sjc crossing restriction. The controller said that the excursion caused no problem and that it happens frequently at that location. I think that the loupe six departure is too complicated, especially when ATC changes any of the crossing restrictions. On a VFR day, it is difficult to maintain traffic watch, run the checklist, and make 2 frequency changes (tower to departure, and departure to center), while flying the loupe six. I believe that the departure should be simplified, and ATC should clear the aircraft to each higher altitude, instead of clearing it to FL190 or FL230 and saying 'comply with crossing restrictions.' the 2 controllers involved in this incident acted properly and professionally. In the future, I will be more careful with 'at', 'at or above', and 'at or below' altitude restrictions.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW OF MLG OVERSHOT CROSSING RESTRICTION ON LOUPE SIX DEP OUT OF SJC.

Narrative: PRIOR TO BLOCK DEP, THE CAPT AND I BRIEFED THE LOUPE SIX DEP, INCLUDING THE XING RESTRICTIONS. AFTER TKOF, WHILE TURNING TO 120 DEG HDG, BAY DEP CLRED US TO CLIMB TO 6000' (INSTEAD OF 5000 PUBLISHED ON THE DEP) UNTIL XING THE SJC 047 RADIAL. WHILE ON THE 120 HDG, AFTER XING THE SJC 047 RADIAL, BAY DEP CLRED US, 'PLT'S DISCRETION DIRECT SJC VOR, COMPLY WITH XING RESTRICTIONS, CLIMB AND MAINTAIN FL190, CONTACT OAKLAND CENTER ON (FREQ).' WHILE WATCHING FOR VFR TFC (ON A SEVERE CLEAR DAY IN THE BAY AREA), I GLANCED AT THE SID CHART, WHICH SHOWS THE FIRST FIX (SJC 047 R) AT OR BELOW 5000, SJC VOR AT 12,000, AND SJC 339R/8 DME AT OR ABOVE 14,000. I MISSED THE AT OVER SJC VOR AND THOUGHT THE RESTRICTION WAS AT OR ABOVE 12,000'. I HAD FL190 IN MIND SINCE THAT WAS OUR CLRED ALT AND THE FIRST XING RESTRICTION HAD ALREADY BEEN CANCELLED AND CHANGED TO 6000'. WE CROSSED SJC VOR AT ABOUT 13-14,000 AND BY THAT TIME, THE CAPT WAS IN CONTACT WITH OAKLAND CENTER, WHO QUERIED US ABOUT MISSING THE SJC XING RESTRICTION. THE CTLR SAID THAT THE EXCURSION CAUSED NO PROBLEM AND THAT IT HAPPENS FREQUENTLY AT THAT LOCATION. I THINK THAT THE LOUPE SIX DEP IS TOO COMPLICATED, ESPECIALLY WHEN ATC CHANGES ANY OF THE XING RESTRICTIONS. ON A VFR DAY, IT IS DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN TFC WATCH, RUN THE CHECKLIST, AND MAKE 2 FREQ CHANGES (TWR TO DEP, AND DEP TO CENTER), WHILE FLYING THE LOUPE SIX. I BELIEVE THAT THE DEP SHOULD BE SIMPLIFIED, AND ATC SHOULD CLEAR THE ACFT TO EACH HIGHER ALT, INSTEAD OF CLEARING IT TO FL190 OR FL230 AND SAYING 'COMPLY WITH XING RESTRICTIONS.' THE 2 CTLRS INVOLVED IN THIS INCIDENT ACTED PROPERLY AND PROFESSIONALLY. IN THE FUTURE, I WILL BE MORE CAREFUL WITH 'AT', 'AT OR ABOVE', AND 'AT OR BELOW' ALT RESTRICTIONS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.