Narrative:

IFR flight from teb to bwi. Our clearance was to fly the teb 5 departure and then as filed. I was in the left seat flying this leg and my copilot was in the right seat. I went over the departure procedure 3 times with the other pilot before being released for takeoff. At vr I rotated; got the gear up and reduced power to comply with the local noise restr. Even with the power reduced; acceleration and climb were happening very quickly. Because it was a noise abatement takeoff I left the flaps down and was climbing at approximately V2 plus 20. I was approaching 1500 ft very fast and as I was leveling I had to get my flaps up and further reduce power so as not to exceed my flap speed of 200 KTS. The departure on runway 19 calls for runway heading to 1500 ft; right turn to 280 degrees and then at teb 4.5 DME climb to 2000 ft. As I was pushing the nose over to level off at 1500 ft; departure controller told us to turn right to a heading of 280 degrees. For whatever reason; that callout completely threw me off and I began a climb to 2000 ft. As I was leveling at 2000 ft the controller noticed my altitude and let me know in no uncertain terms that I needed to be back at 1500 ft. I immediately descended back down and about the time I leveled off he cleared us up to 4000 ft (I think) and pointed out the airliner bound for newark that was the potential conflict. I felt really bad about my mistake and was infinitely appreciative that the controller didn't issue a phone number to call. I could sense from his tone that 'another' pro pilot had blown it. I had flown the same departure 2 nights before; only that one was from runway 1. Runway 1's departure is a turn to 040 degree heading climbing to 1500 ft then left turn to climb and cross pnj at 2000 ft and then a climb to 3000 ft. I've been a west coast based pilot for the past 10 years and have been in and out of teb many times. I had always wondered what the big deal was about the teb 5 departure and why so many deviations were occurring and it was my turn to find out. I attribute my deviation to several distraction factors: 1) executing a noise abatement take-off. Manipulating power and attitude and monitoring configuration can cause a loss of focus; especially when a low initial altitude restr can be reached in a matter of seconds. 2) unexpected callout by ATC. Had the departure controller not said anything ('turn right to a heading of 280') which is just what I was about to do anyway; I would have flown the departure as published. But for some reason; at the time; I must have thought that he was giving me vector and taking me off the SID. 3) flying a different variant of the same departure 48 hours prior. Maybe my brain defaulted to the northerly departure procedure. I don't think the authors of this departure procedure fully appreciate how busy a cockpit can get and how rapidly things happen while flying a jet during the take-off and initial climb phase. I realize that the close proximity of high volume airports necessitate the need for a SID like the teb 5. But as long as it continues to have low altitude step-ups combined with varying headings and boundaries; the potential for a deviation will always exist.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A FALCON 20 PLT WAS GIVEN A HDG CHANGE WHILE LEVELING AT 1500 FT ON THE TEB 5 SID AND WHILE CHANGING HDG MISTAKENLY CLBED TO 2000 FT.

Narrative: IFR FLT FROM TEB TO BWI. OUR CLRNC WAS TO FLY THE TEB 5 DEP AND THEN AS FILED. I WAS IN THE L SEAT FLYING THIS LEG AND MY COPLT WAS IN THE R SEAT. I WENT OVER THE DEP PROC 3 TIMES WITH THE OTHER PLT BEFORE BEING RELEASED FOR TKOF. AT VR I ROTATED; GOT THE GEAR UP AND REDUCED PWR TO COMPLY WITH THE LOCAL NOISE RESTR. EVEN WITH THE PWR REDUCED; ACCELERATION AND CLB WERE HAPPENING VERY QUICKLY. BECAUSE IT WAS A NOISE ABATEMENT TAKEOFF I LEFT THE FLAPS DOWN AND WAS CLBING AT APPROX V2 PLUS 20. I WAS APCHING 1500 FT VERY FAST AND AS I WAS LEVELING I HAD TO GET MY FLAPS UP AND FURTHER REDUCE PWR SO AS NOT TO EXCEED MY FLAP SPEED OF 200 KTS. THE DEP ON RWY 19 CALLS FOR RWY HEADING TO 1500 FT; RIGHT TURN TO 280 DEGS AND THEN AT TEB 4.5 DME CLB TO 2000 FT. AS I WAS PUSHING THE NOSE OVER TO LEVEL OFF AT 1500 FT; DEP CTLR TOLD US TO TURN R TO A HEADING OF 280 DEGS. FOR WHATEVER REASON; THAT CALLOUT COMPLETELY THREW ME OFF AND I BEGAN A CLB TO 2000 FT. AS I WAS LEVELING AT 2000 FT THE CTLR NOTICED MY ALT AND LET ME KNOW IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT I NEEDED TO BE BACK AT 1500 FT. I IMMEDIATELY DESCENDED BACK DOWN AND ABOUT THE TIME I LEVELED OFF HE CLRED US UP TO 4000 FT (I THINK) AND POINTED OUT THE AIRLINER BOUND FOR NEWARK THAT WAS THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT. I FELT REALLY BAD ABOUT MY MISTAKE AND WAS INFINITELY APPRECIATIVE THAT THE CTLR DIDN'T ISSUE A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL. I COULD SENSE FROM HIS TONE THAT 'ANOTHER' PRO PLT HAD BLOWN IT. I HAD FLOWN THE SAME DEP 2 NIGHTS BEFORE; ONLY THAT ONE WAS FROM RWY 1. RWY 1'S DEP IS A TURN TO 040 DEG HEADING CLBING TO 1500 FT THEN LEFT TURN TO CLB AND CROSS PNJ AT 2000 FT AND THEN A CLB TO 3000 FT. I'VE BEEN A WEST COAST BASED PLT FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS AND HAVE BEEN IN AND OUT OF TEB MANY TIMES. I HAD ALWAYS WONDERED WHAT THE BIG DEAL WAS ABOUT THE TEB 5 DEP AND WHY SO MANY DEVIATIONS WERE OCCURRING AND IT WAS MY TURN TO FIND OUT. I ATTRIBUTE MY DEV TO SEVERAL DISTR FACTORS: 1) EXECUTING A NOISE ABATEMENT TAKE-OFF. MANIPULATING PWR AND ATTITUDE AND MONITORING CONFIGURATION CAN CAUSE A LOSS OF FOCUS; ESPECIALLY WHEN A LOW INITIAL ALT RESTR CAN BE REACHED IN A MATTER OF SECONDS. 2) UNEXPECTED CALLOUT BY ATC. HAD THE DEP CTLR NOT SAID ANYTHING ('TURN R TO A HEADING OF 280') WHICH IS JUST WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO DO ANYWAY; I WOULD HAVE FLOWN THE DEP AS PUBLISHED. BUT FOR SOME REASON; AT THE TIME; I MUST HAVE THOUGHT THAT HE WAS GIVING ME VECTOR AND TAKING ME OFF THE SID. 3) FLYING A DIFFERENT VARIANT OF THE SAME DEP 48 HRS PRIOR. MAYBE MY BRAIN DEFAULTED TO THE NORTHERLY DEP PROC. I DON'T THINK THE AUTHORS OF THIS DEP PROC FULLY APPRECIATE HOW BUSY A COCKPIT CAN GET AND HOW RAPIDLY THINGS HAPPEN WHILE FLYING A JET DURING THE TAKE-OFF AND INITIAL CLB PHASE. I REALIZE THAT THE CLOSE PROXIMITY OF HIGH VOLUME ARPTS NECESSITATE THE NEED FOR A SID LIKE THE TEB 5. BUT AS LONG AS IT CONTINUES TO HAVE LOW ALT STEP-UPS COMBINED WITH VARYING HEADINGS AND BOUNDARIES; THE POTENTIAL FOR A DEVIATION WILL ALWAYS EXIST.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.