Narrative:

Departing gva (geneva switz) runway 05 clearance/dijon 5A-geneva to apris-cdg. As PF, I had completed the before start checklist and the captain and I had agreed the first 'level off' altitude restriction was FL200 after meeting a 7000' terrain restriction. We both had the current commercial (dijon 5A) chart out and clipped on the sliding window chart holder. In short, after meeting the 7000' restriction, we turned on course and were flying the published course as we understood it. I might add that we were in radar contact with departure control. After leveling at FL200, we called departure controller. He inquired about our altitude by asking who had cleared us to FL200. We replied, 'the dij-5A.' he said we should have leveled at 9000'. Then changed us to center/en route frequency. On closer inspection of the commercial chart, the 9000' restriction was located as the last item in a very complex narrative that consumed approximately 4' of the side bar portion of the chart. The 'route portrayal' portion of the chart (plan view) indicated the 7000' and 20000' restrictions, but the 9000' was only in the narrative portion and is obviously extremely important. European SID's are usually complex, but fairly well depicted in the map (plan view) portion, especially altitude restrictions. I am fairly familiar with paris (cdg) and london (lgw) and their procedures seem easily interpreted. I feel this is a glaring error in charting due to either the seiss, or commercial chart makers oversight. Two experienced pilots, paying attention, made the same mistake. The controller's 'disgust' showed in his tone and I feel he was satisfied with his 'pound of flesh', but I am deeply disturbed by the fact that the chart must meet legal requirements, but fails in 'real world' human terms. Judging from the controller's response, I doubt we were the first to climb to FL200. It seems that better charting would be much more effective than admonishment over the radio.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR WDB ALT DEVIATION EXCURSION FROM CLRNC ALT FLYING SID FROM GVA.

Narrative: DEPARTING GVA (GENEVA SWITZ) RWY 05 CLRNC/DIJON 5A-GENEVA TO APRIS-CDG. AS PF, I HAD COMPLETED THE BEFORE START CHKLIST AND THE CAPT AND I HAD AGREED THE FIRST 'LEVEL OFF' ALT RESTRICTION WAS FL200 AFTER MEETING A 7000' TERRAIN RESTRICTION. WE BOTH HAD THE CURRENT COMMERCIAL (DIJON 5A) CHART OUT AND CLIPPED ON THE SLIDING WINDOW CHART HOLDER. IN SHORT, AFTER MEETING THE 7000' RESTRICTION, WE TURNED ON COURSE AND WERE FLYING THE PUBLISHED COURSE AS WE UNDERSTOOD IT. I MIGHT ADD THAT WE WERE IN RADAR CONTACT WITH DEP CTL. AFTER LEVELING AT FL200, WE CALLED DEP CTLR. HE INQUIRED ABOUT OUR ALT BY ASKING WHO HAD CLRED US TO FL200. WE REPLIED, 'THE DIJ-5A.' HE SAID WE SHOULD HAVE LEVELED AT 9000'. THEN CHANGED US TO CTR/ENRTE FREQ. ON CLOSER INSPECTION OF THE COMMERCIAL CHART, THE 9000' RESTRICTION WAS LOCATED AS THE LAST ITEM IN A VERY COMPLEX NARRATIVE THAT CONSUMED APPROX 4' OF THE SIDE BAR PORTION OF THE CHART. THE 'RTE PORTRAYAL' PORTION OF THE CHART (PLAN VIEW) INDICATED THE 7000' AND 20000' RESTRICTIONS, BUT THE 9000' WAS ONLY IN THE NARRATIVE PORTION AND IS OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. EUROPEAN SID'S ARE USUALLY COMPLEX, BUT FAIRLY WELL DEPICTED IN THE MAP (PLAN VIEW) PORTION, ESPECIALLY ALT RESTRICTIONS. I AM FAIRLY FAMILIAR WITH PARIS (CDG) AND LONDON (LGW) AND THEIR PROCS SEEM EASILY INTERPRETED. I FEEL THIS IS A GLARING ERROR IN CHARTING DUE TO EITHER THE SEISS, OR COMMERCIAL CHART MAKERS OVERSIGHT. TWO EXPERIENCED PLTS, PAYING ATTN, MADE THE SAME MISTAKE. THE CTLR'S 'DISGUST' SHOWED IN HIS TONE AND I FEEL HE WAS SATISFIED WITH HIS 'POUND OF FLESH', BUT I AM DEEPLY DISTURBED BY THE FACT THAT THE CHART MUST MEET LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, BUT FAILS IN 'REAL WORLD' HUMAN TERMS. JUDGING FROM THE CTLR'S RESPONSE, I DOUBT WE WERE THE FIRST TO CLB TO FL200. IT SEEMS THAT BETTER CHARTING WOULD BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE THAN ADMONISHMENT OVER THE RADIO.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.