Narrative:

I was working the newark departure position. Small aircraft X departed teterboro airport runway 24 on an IFR flight plan. The aircraft appeared to climb on runway heading and failed to call on the departure frequency. I called the aircraft and received no response. I then called teterboro tower, he was not with them either. When the aircraft called me he was above a newark arrival by 200 ft and 1/2 mi to his right. I turned the aircraft wbound away from the newark final and reported the incident. The teterboro SID off runway 24 reads climb on runway heading to 1500 until crossing the pnj 195 degree bearing. There was a west wind pushing teb departures into the newark final. This is an extremely complex area where margin for error is extremely small to non existent. This is the third time I personally have had aircraft deviation from the SID and come dangerously close to an air carrier going into newark this particular pilot did not appear to be highly experienced or aware. He never saw the medium large transport although in my estimate they passed possibly as close as 1/4 mi while 1 was climbing and the other descending. The SID off runway 24 at teb should be changed to an immediate turn to 260 degree after departure to increase the margin of error. Noise abatement is important however with a stronger west wind, this particular pilot deviation could have made much more noise with an medium large transport landing in a residential neighborhood. The alternative is to depend on pilot's departing teterboro to never error. This is ridiculous, I work it every day and prevent them from doing so only because they call me in time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA DEP TEB IFR, NO RADIO CONTACT, WIND PUSHES ACFT INTO FLT PATTERN FOR EWR. CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER ACFT.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE NEWARK DEP POS. SMA X DEPARTED TETERBORO ARPT RWY 24 ON AN IFR FLT PLAN. THE ACFT APPEARED TO CLB ON RWY HDG AND FAILED TO CALL ON THE DEP FREQ. I CALLED THE ACFT AND RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. I THEN CALLED TETERBORO TWR, HE WAS NOT WITH THEM EITHER. WHEN THE ACFT CALLED ME HE WAS ABOVE A NEWARK ARR BY 200 FT AND 1/2 MI TO HIS R. I TURNED THE ACFT WBOUND AWAY FROM THE NEWARK FINAL AND RPTED THE INCIDENT. THE TETERBORO SID OFF RWY 24 READS CLB ON RWY HDG TO 1500 UNTIL XING THE PNJ 195 DEG BEARING. THERE WAS A W WIND PUSHING TEB DEPS INTO THE NEWARK FINAL. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY COMPLEX AREA WHERE MARGIN FOR ERROR IS EXTREMELY SMALL TO NON EXISTENT. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME I PERSONALLY HAVE HAD ACFT DEV FROM THE SID AND COME DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO AN AIR CARRIER GOING INTO NEWARK THIS PARTICULAR PLT DID NOT APPEAR TO BE HIGHLY EXPERIENCED OR AWARE. HE NEVER SAW THE MLG ALTHOUGH IN MY ESTIMATE THEY PASSED POSSIBLY AS CLOSE AS 1/4 MI WHILE 1 WAS CLBING AND THE OTHER DSNDING. THE SID OFF RWY 24 AT TEB SHOULD BE CHANGED TO AN IMMEDIATE TURN TO 260 DEG AFTER DEP TO INCREASE THE MARGIN OF ERROR. NOISE ABATEMENT IS IMPORTANT HOWEVER WITH A STRONGER W WIND, THIS PARTICULAR PLT DEV COULD HAVE MADE MUCH MORE NOISE WITH AN MLG LNDG IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO DEPEND ON PLT'S DEPARTING TETERBORO TO NEVER ERROR. THIS IS RIDICULOUS, I WORK IT EVERY DAY AND PREVENT THEM FROM DOING SO ONLY BECAUSE THEY CALL ME IN TIME.

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.