Narrative:

Given the loupe 6 departure SID from sjc. After takeoff turned to heading 120 degrees at 1.8 DME. While climbing departure stated 'turn right, direct to the VOR, direct to the VOR, direct sacramento.' as this differs from the SID, we thought the altitude restriction of 14000' at sjc VOR was deleted. When we crossed the VOR at 9400' departure asked us about our altitude. At this point he stated that he had said the turn to the VOR was at our discretion to make 12000' over sjc VOR. The 3 of us never heard it. We then asked if he wanted us to do a 360 degree turn to gain the altitude over the VOR. He replied 'negative, proceed on course.' after discussing the incident with the crew, we decided that we should have questioned the instruction that differed from the SID instead of assuming that the controller had altered our departure plan.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CLRNC MISUNDERSTANDING FOR ACR LGT ON SJC LOUPE 6 SID.

Narrative: GIVEN THE LOUPE 6 DEP SID FROM SJC. AFTER TKOF TURNED TO HDG 120 DEGS AT 1.8 DME. WHILE CLBING DEP STATED 'TURN RIGHT, DIRECT TO THE VOR, DIRECT TO THE VOR, DIRECT SACRAMENTO.' AS THIS DIFFERS FROM THE SID, WE THOUGHT THE ALT RESTRICTION OF 14000' AT SJC VOR WAS DELETED. WHEN WE CROSSED THE VOR AT 9400' DEP ASKED US ABOUT OUR ALT. AT THIS POINT HE STATED THAT HE HAD SAID THE TURN TO THE VOR WAS AT OUR DISCRETION TO MAKE 12000' OVER SJC VOR. THE 3 OF US NEVER HEARD IT. WE THEN ASKED IF HE WANTED US TO DO A 360 DEG TURN TO GAIN THE ALT OVER THE VOR. HE REPLIED 'NEGATIVE, PROCEED ON COURSE.' AFTER DISCUSSING THE INCIDENT WITH THE CREW, WE DECIDED THAT WE SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONED THE INSTRUCTION THAT DIFFERED FROM THE SID INSTEAD OF ASSUMING THAT THE CTLR HAD ALTERED OUR DEP PLAN.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.