Narrative:

[We] departed teb on RUUDY3. Climbed to 1;500; non-flying pilot retracted gear and flaps on schedule and was told to contact ny departure which he did. We were turning over wentz at 1;500 ft when he made the initial check on with ny and we both heard the reply 'radar contact; turn to heading 160; maintain 2;000 ft'. The heading of 160 was unusual so we both agreed to query. Ny was now talking to someone else so there was a time delay in getting back to him; in this time I had begun a slow climb and turn. When pilot not flying finally got a word in we had climbed approximately 600 ft and turned maybe 20 degrees. The controller seemed surprised to hear from our query saying it was the first he had heard from us. We returned to 1;500 ft and course. I believe frequency congestion was the primary cause of this error with a little 'expectation' error. It seems we and another aircraft must have checked on at the same time and the controller responded to the other aircraft either he did not use [call sign] or we were still talking during check on and covered the other aircraft call sign. Anticipation of the 2;000 ft assigned alt. Is what was plausible about the instructions; the heading of 160 is what we both questioned about the instructions. I believe if ATC would let us fly this departure with no deviations to instructions until we are out from under ewr area even when there is no conflicting traffic overhead we would not be in the position of an 'expectation' error.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CE-750 First Officer climbed through charted altitude on RUUDY3 departure from TEB when an ATC clearance was misinterpreted.

Narrative: [We] departed TEB on RUUDY3. Climbed to 1;500; non-flying pilot retracted gear and flaps on schedule and was told to contact NY Departure which he did. We were turning over WENTZ at 1;500 FT when he made the initial check on with NY and we both heard the reply 'radar contact; turn to heading 160; maintain 2;000 FT'. The heading of 160 was unusual so we both agreed to query. NY was now talking to someone else so there was a time delay in getting back to him; in this time I had begun a slow climb and turn. When pilot not flying finally got a word in we had climbed approximately 600 FT and turned maybe 20 degrees. The Controller seemed surprised to hear from our query saying it was the first he had heard from us. We returned to 1;500 FT and course. I believe frequency congestion was the primary cause of this error with a little 'expectation' error. It seems we and another aircraft must have checked on at the same time and the Controller responded to the other aircraft either he did not use [call sign] or we were still talking during check on and covered the other aircraft call sign. Anticipation of the 2;000 FT assigned alt. is what was plausible about the instructions; the heading of 160 is what we both questioned about the instructions. I believe if ATC would let us fly this departure with no deviations to instructions until we are out from under EWR area even when there is no conflicting traffic overhead we would not be in the position of an 'expectation' error.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.