An air carrier captain departed on the ORD8 with a 4;000 ft MCP constraint. After the 8 DME at 4;000...

Narrative:

Departing on the ORD8 SID; we leveled off at 4;000 ft after meeting the crossing restriction at 8 DME. ATC called us and the preceding flight and told us to continue the climb to 5;000 ft. We had briefed the SID and both agreed on all facets of the procedure; including the wrong altitude of 4;000 ft in the MCP window. We'd both read the SID; had briefed the DME/altitude restrictions; 'at or above' 4;000 ft at 8 NM; etc.; had the procedure out for reference and never noticed we'd misinterpreted the final altitude. Upon reflection on how this happened; a few things come to mind. The crossing restriction of 4;000 ft at 8 DME; the verbiage has maintain 4;000 ft; then the final altitude of 5;000 ft after the fold in the paper chart. Also; as the missed approach altitude is 4;000 ft; it's already in the MCP window from the previous arrival; alluding that is the 'proper' setting (we brought the plane in). I have been told by others in the last two days that this same occurrence was briefed but corrected by a crew member who had experienced the mistake first hand. As professionals; we strive for SOP adherence. This seems a perfect storm of circumstances that align to challenge proper understanding of what on the surface appears to be a straight forward procedure.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An Air Carrier Captain departed on the ORD8 with a 4;000 FT MCP constraint. After the 8 DME at 4;000 FT; ATC cleared him to 5;000 FT and asked another flight and he why they had leveled at 4;000 FT verses the 5;000 FT assigned on the SID. Many aircraft were making the same error.

Narrative: Departing on the ORD8 SID; we leveled off at 4;000 FT after meeting the crossing restriction at 8 DME. ATC called us and the preceding flight and told us to continue the climb to 5;000 FT. We had briefed the SID and both agreed on all facets of the procedure; including the wrong altitude of 4;000 FT in the MCP window. We'd both read the SID; had briefed the DME/altitude restrictions; 'at or above' 4;000 FT at 8 NM; etc.; had the procedure out for reference and never noticed we'd misinterpreted the final altitude. Upon reflection on how this happened; a few things come to mind. The crossing restriction of 4;000 FT at 8 DME; the verbiage has maintain 4;000 FT; then the final altitude of 5;000 FT after the fold in the paper chart. Also; as the missed approach altitude is 4;000 FT; it's already in the MCP window from the previous arrival; alluding that is the 'proper' setting (we brought the plane in). I have been told by others in the last two days that this same occurrence was briefed but corrected by a crew member who had experienced the mistake first hand. As professionals; we strive for SOP adherence. This seems a perfect storm of circumstances that align to challenge proper understanding of what on the surface appears to be a straight forward procedure.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.

Attributes
ACN	1176088
Time
Date	201405
Local Time Of Day	0601-1200
Place
Locale Reference	ORD.Airport
State Reference	IL
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Large Transport Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Climb
Route In Use	SID ORD8
Flight Plan	IFR
Component
Aircraft Component	MCP
Person 1
Function	Pilot Flying Captain
Events
Anomaly	Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude Deviation - Altitude Overshoot Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Procedural Clearance

An air carrier captain departed on the ORD8 with a 4;000 ft MCP constraint. After the 8 DME at 4;000 ft; ATC cleared him to 5;000 ft and asked another flight and he why they had leveled at 4;000 ft verses the 5;000 ft assigned on the SID. Many aircraft were making the same error.