Narrative:

Taxiing out for takeoff at washington dulles. The sic said that he couldn't get the departure procedure blown up on the hand held electronic chart unit and had to switch units. Somewhere during this briefing, he thought that I said that our initial altitude was 7000 ft and changed the alerter to it instead of the assigned 3000 ft. During this confusion, he reviewed the departure procedure quickly -- though not the altitude. On climb out, before reaching 3000 ft, we checked on with potomac approach climbing to 7000 ft, at which point he quickly re-cleared us to 5000 ft and questioned us on our original clearance. While thanks to the quick reaction of the controller, and altitude violation was averted, I feel compelled to send this report due to what I believe was the main contributing factor in this incident. While confusion with the airplane taxiing ahead of us didn't help, it was a minor factor compared with the hand held electronic charts. The fujitsu unit we use can barely be seen in the daylight by the pilot holding it, let alone the pilot taxiing. It also seems that they pick the worst time to start acting up. As the PF cannot simply look over and review the chart, he has to rely on memory or his sic to help, or pull out his own unit to review -- which is often impractical when your attention is diverted during busy taxi or flying times. I really don't know what the best answer to these electronic units is. Possibly a better panel mounted unit that both pilots can see or even a better hand held unit -- barring this better training needs to take place to safely use the units we have.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW OF BE40 BARELY AVOID ALTDEV WHICH RESULTED FROM THE DIFFICULTY IN USING THE HAND HELD ELECTRONIC CHART UNITS EMPLOYED BY THEIR COMPANY.

Narrative: TAXIING OUT FOR TKOF AT WASHINGTON DULLES. THE SIC SAID THAT HE COULDN'T GET THE DEP PROC BLOWN UP ON THE HAND HELD ELECTRONIC CHART UNIT AND HAD TO SWITCH UNITS. SOMEWHERE DURING THIS BRIEFING, HE THOUGHT THAT I SAID THAT OUR INITIAL ALT WAS 7000 FT AND CHANGED THE ALERTER TO IT INSTEAD OF THE ASSIGNED 3000 FT. DURING THIS CONFUSION, HE REVIEWED THE DEP PROC QUICKLY -- THOUGH NOT THE ALT. ON CLBOUT, BEFORE REACHING 3000 FT, WE CHKED ON WITH POTOMAC APCH CLBING TO 7000 FT, AT WHICH POINT HE QUICKLY RE-CLRED US TO 5000 FT AND QUESTIONED US ON OUR ORIGINAL CLRNC. WHILE THANKS TO THE QUICK REACTION OF THE CTLR, AND ALT VIOLATION WAS AVERTED, I FEEL COMPELLED TO SEND THIS RPT DUE TO WHAT I BELIEVE WAS THE MAIN CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IN THIS INCIDENT. WHILE CONFUSION WITH THE AIRPLANE TAXIING AHEAD OF US DIDN'T HELP, IT WAS A MINOR FACTOR COMPARED WITH THE HAND HELD ELECTRONIC CHARTS. THE FUJITSU UNIT WE USE CAN BARELY BE SEEN IN THE DAYLIGHT BY THE PLT HOLDING IT, LET ALONE THE PLT TAXIING. IT ALSO SEEMS THAT THEY PICK THE WORST TIME TO START ACTING UP. AS THE PF CANNOT SIMPLY LOOK OVER AND REVIEW THE CHART, HE HAS TO RELY ON MEMORY OR HIS SIC TO HELP, OR PULL OUT HIS OWN UNIT TO REVIEW -- WHICH IS OFTEN IMPRACTICAL WHEN YOUR ATTN IS DIVERTED DURING BUSY TAXI OR FLYING TIMES. I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BEST ANSWER TO THESE ELECTRONIC UNITS IS. POSSIBLY A BETTER PANEL MOUNTED UNIT THAT BOTH PLTS CAN SEE OR EVEN A BETTER HAND HELD UNIT -- BARRING THIS BETTER TRAINING NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE TO SAFELY USE THE UNITS WE HAVE.

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.