Narrative:

I had prefiled an IFR departure from san carlos, direct oak, direct sac, direct to 061, my home field. Sql ground cleared me to cameron park (061) to fly runway heading and at the diamond waterway, turn right to 120 degrees, within 2 mi of the airport, radar vectors V6, sac, direct. Maintain 1100' until passing oak 165 degree right, maintain 2000'. Departure 135.65, squawk xabc. The clearance was read back and I made my first IFR departure from this unfamiliar field. After takeoff I made contact and was acknowledged by departure control. I was unable to visually identify the diamond waterway and departure control directed my right turn. I may have then been at 1100', but I am not certain. Thereafter, I was established on a heading of 120 degrees and began my climb to 2000'. When I was climbing through 1500' departure control directed me to immediately descend to 1100'. I made an immediate descent and a transport for sfo was then released by departure control to descend from 3000'. That airplane was held at altitude, I believe, because I had broken an altitude restriction, although it was not directly stated as such in the clearance. After I resumed 1100', departure control directed me to study the departure with greater care. The problem was caused because I had not made a complete picture of the departure, neither on the san francisco area chart nor, in retrospect, in my mind. Owing to my unfamiliarity with the area and the mixed VFR/IFR departure, better plan would have been to draw out the departure on the chart, along with the extension of the oak 165 degree right as the altitude restriction. Then when the departure began to deteriorate after missing the visual chkpoint, I would have provided myself with an additional visual chkpoint, which study would have shown as the eastern edge of the san carlos airport. The airport does not have a published approach although it does have a nonpublished standard departure, to prevent any conflict with landing traffic at sfo. I would suggest that the standard departure be published as a SID to prevent confusion and provide the pilot with a pictorial of the area, with VOR, airport and visual references. The san francisco bay area has dense ground clutter that obscures the visual reference in the boat marina and a published departure would help minimize pilot confusion and show an additional visual chkpoint such as the departure airport which was not included in the verbal clearance issued by ground control.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALT DEVIATION, ALT EXCURSION.

Narrative: I HAD PREFILED AN IFR DEP FROM SAN CARLOS, DIRECT OAK, DIRECT SAC, DIRECT TO 061, MY HOME FIELD. SQL GND CLRED ME TO CAMERON PARK (061) TO FLY RWY HDG AND AT THE DIAMOND WATERWAY, TURN RIGHT TO 120 DEGS, WITHIN 2 MI OF THE ARPT, RADAR VECTORS V6, SAC, DIRECT. MAINTAIN 1100' UNTIL PASSING OAK 165 DEG R, MAINTAIN 2000'. DEP 135.65, SQUAWK XABC. THE CLRNC WAS READ BACK AND I MADE MY FIRST IFR DEP FROM THIS UNFAMILIAR FIELD. AFTER TKOF I MADE CONTACT AND WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY DEP CTL. I WAS UNABLE TO VISUALLY IDENT THE DIAMOND WATERWAY AND DEP CTL DIRECTED MY RIGHT TURN. I MAY HAVE THEN BEEN AT 1100', BUT I AM NOT CERTAIN. THEREAFTER, I WAS ESTABLISHED ON A HDG OF 120 DEGS AND BEGAN MY CLB TO 2000'. WHEN I WAS CLBING THROUGH 1500' DEP CTL DIRECTED ME TO IMMEDIATELY DSND TO 1100'. I MADE AN IMMEDIATE DSCNT AND A TRANSPORT FOR SFO WAS THEN RELEASED BY DEP CTL TO DSND FROM 3000'. THAT AIRPLANE WAS HELD AT ALT, I BELIEVE, BECAUSE I HAD BROKEN AN ALT RESTRICTION, ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOT DIRECTLY STATED AS SUCH IN THE CLRNC. AFTER I RESUMED 1100', DEP CTL DIRECTED ME TO STUDY THE DEP WITH GREATER CARE. THE PROB WAS CAUSED BECAUSE I HAD NOT MADE A COMPLETE PICTURE OF THE DEP, NEITHER ON THE SAN FRANCISCO AREA CHART NOR, IN RETROSPECT, IN MY MIND. OWING TO MY UNFAMILIARITY WITH THE AREA AND THE MIXED VFR/IFR DEP, BETTER PLAN WOULD HAVE BEEN TO DRAW OUT THE DEP ON THE CHART, ALONG WITH THE EXTENSION OF THE OAK 165 DEG R AS THE ALT RESTRICTION. THEN WHEN THE DEP BEGAN TO DETERIORATE AFTER MISSING THE VISUAL CHKPOINT, I WOULD HAVE PROVIDED MYSELF WITH AN ADDITIONAL VISUAL CHKPOINT, WHICH STUDY WOULD HAVE SHOWN AS THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE SAN CARLOS ARPT. THE ARPT DOES NOT HAVE A PUBLISHED APCH ALTHOUGH IT DOES HAVE A NONPUBLISHED STANDARD DEP, TO PREVENT ANY CONFLICT WITH LNDG TFC AT SFO. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE STANDARD DEP BE PUBLISHED AS A SID TO PREVENT CONFUSION AND PROVIDE THE PLT WITH A PICTORIAL OF THE AREA, WITH VOR, ARPT AND VISUAL REFERENCES. THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA HAS DENSE GND CLUTTER THAT OBSCURES THE VISUAL REF IN THE BOAT MARINA AND A PUBLISHED DEP WOULD HELP MINIMIZE PLT CONFUSION AND SHOW AN ADDITIONAL VISUAL CHKPOINT SUCH AS THE DEP ARPT WHICH WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE VERBAL CLRNC ISSUED BY GND CTL.

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.