A LR45 crew missed a OAK5 crossing restriction after departing Runway 29 because a runway change required reprogramming the FMS and using an EFB airport chart for taxi guidance. The distractions caused the crew to miss the OAK5 crossing restriction.
Synopsis
A LR45 crew missed a OAK5 crossing restriction after departing Runway 29 because a runway change required reprogramming the FMS and using an EFB airport chart for taxi guidance. The distractions caused the crew to miss the OAK5 crossing restriction.
Narrative
Flight was a reposition flight to a nearby airport. Total distance 20 NM. Captain on leg was inside aircraft doing interior preflight and getting the clearance. I was not flying the leg but did file the flight plan using my name as PIC. Outside I was de-icing; overseeing fueling and O2 replenishment. When all were accomplished we taxied out to the runway. When the checklist came to briefing the route the Captain stated that we were given the Oakland 5 Departure and Quote 'It's just a simple vector departure.' Our charts are printed out but on EFB's. I did not check this statement or pull up the SID. I was engrossed in our taxi route which was complex. This involved multiple hold shorts and 2 ground frequencies on the way to Runway 29. I was following this closely on the EFB. When we arrived at the departure end of the runway we were not ready for the departure; in hindsight. The cross 2000 FT from the OAK VOR was not set. But our ultimate altitude of 5000 FT was in the altitude alerter. So as the Captain climbed out; NORCAL told us to maintain 3000 FT which we did. Then informed us the Oakland 5 had a crossing restriction 4 miles/2000 FT. Luckily no aircraft were on our TCAS and in short order were allowed to climb to 5000 FT.
NASA callback
The reporter stated that the primary factor in this event was the aircraft's FMS not listing the OAK5 SID. When the crew preflighted they had expected Runway 27 because that was nearest their parking location. When OAK Tower assigned Runway 29 for noise abatement; a FMS route change was required. After selecting the new runway the aircraft takeoff performance data and initial routing dropped out the FMS requiring reprogramming. Since the taxi to Runway 29 was now very complex and long; both pilots were looking at the taxi routing and the reporter had his laptop computer EFB up following the taxiway routing. In the meantime; the new runway and flight routing had to be selected as well as reviewing the SID from the EFB since they had no printed copy. When the new runway was selected in the FMC; the OAK5 SID was not one of the selectable options and so the SID routing had to be entered manually. In that process the 2;000 FT restriction at 4 DME was missed and not included as a constraint shortly after takeoff.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.