Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Human Factors
During pre-departure briefing; the crew discussed the ORD 4 departure procedure with special attention paid by the SIC (pilot monitoring) to the 250 knots until advised notation on the SID. The PIC (pilot flying) seemed especially concerned instead with two 'At or Above' altitude requirements on the SID that are noise abatement limitations that would be easily met with a normal climb at the departure weight and temperature. The PIC seemed distracted by the altitude requirements to the point of entering additional waypoints in the flight plan and the corresponding altitudes. During taxi out; complicated taxi instructions from Ground Control on a large; unfamiliar; air-carrier centric airport led to substantial confusion during taxi and a breakdown in crew communication. Multiple deviations from SOP by the PIC including typing in the FMS while taxiing; incomplete or non-existent acknowledgment of SIC communication; and other SOP non-compliance contributed to a high stress level in the cockpit. Immediately following a normal departure; the PIC deselected autothrottle (as is his habit) and refused the SIC offer to select a vertical mode for climb (also his habit) while he hand-flew the climb out. The crew turned to the ATC assigned heading and acknowledged the climb instructions to an altitude above 10;000 feet. A few minutes later; the crew was handed off to a different Departure Controller who informed the crew 'resume normal speed' and assigned a climb to a higher altitude. It was at that point the SIC realized the aircraft was at 300 knots and had exceeded the 250 knots until advised limitation listed on the SID. ATC made no mention of the exceedance and the crew continued the flight uneventfully.In my opinion; poor crew interaction; multiple SOP violations and poor automation usage decisions by the PIC contributed to a feeling of general distraction in the cockpit and improper monitoring of flight path and speed control during climb out. Because of the PIC's refusal to use autothrottle; vertical mode control; or autopilot during climbout from a very busy terminal area; the SIC was forced to spend additional effort monitoring basic flying in between multiple frequency changes and clearance readbacks. Consequently; an important detail like compliance with a speed limitation was missed. The PIC's violations of SOP (including all programing of the FMS; even while hand-flying) and his indifference and even hostility to SIC input led to a complete breakdown in CRM. This PIC is known for difficulties in the cockpit and by most accounts is unwilling or unable to change his habits or cockpit demeanor. Short of refusing this crew pairing in the future; I'm not sure what suggestions to make.
Fractional aircraft First Officer reported SOP deviations and CRM breakdowns contributed to a speed deviation departing ORD.