Narrative:

The problem arose at the end of a VFR local round robin when bay approach could not/would not respond to attempts to get flight following northbound on the west coast of the sfo peninsula. Attempts were made from half moon bay to a little past pacifica at which time I gave up and continued to the golden gate. Contributing was low clouds on some hill crests, a remote possibility of fog at the destination, a recent history of both radios being intermittent (but these were removed/replaced and gave no problems during the flight including contacts with moffett tower, mry approach). The unusual protrusion of the TCA on its western edge is slightly unusual. A major contributor is the inability of approach to skin paint and must rely on xponders. I discovered the problem after landing when moffett tower gave me a message to call supervisor bay TRACON. I was notified that I had been tracked by bay approach. To quote the FAA, I had 'nicked' their TCA and will be grounded 60 days ('automatic since cerritos'). This action and resulting discussions has now made me understand why I have heard pilots discussing pros and cons of turning off their xponders (on 1200) when they are in areas where such violations are possible. Corrective action: I strongly feel FAA/approach radar should have 'skin paint' capability. My point is our ATC system should not depend on cooperative systems such as xponders. Only the innocent gets hurt for using it. Uncooperative targets can use it as they desire. Radar was specifically developed to detect hostile, dangerous, and uncooperative targets. Xponders were developed to tell who the friends are (IFF=identify friend/foe) and they still do, but now we can't locate the foes. I feel this problem is clearly stated in a recent aviation week and space technology article which said lax approach was using an army artillery spotting radar for this purpose on a trial basis. The FAA could do a family tree analysis to clearly define this hazard if it is not obvious from history or the above discussion. Corrective action: take action to get better cooperation from ATC. Frequent pilot complaints at 4 clubs I belong to and many flying magazines indicate this is a frequent occurrence. A short caution in flight and ahead of time would allow me to double check position and not wonder if a parallel flight might have gotten confused with mine.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA UNAUTH PENETRATION OF SFO TCA.

Narrative: THE PROB AROSE AT THE END OF A VFR LCL ROUND ROBIN WHEN BAY APCH COULD NOT/WOULD NOT RESPOND TO ATTEMPTS TO GET FLT FOLLOWING NBOUND ON THE W COAST OF THE SFO PENINSULA. ATTEMPTS WERE MADE FROM HALF MOON BAY TO A LITTLE PAST PACIFICA AT WHICH TIME I GAVE UP AND CONTINUED TO THE GOLDEN GATE. CONTRIBUTING WAS LOW CLOUDS ON SOME HILL CRESTS, A REMOTE POSSIBILITY OF FOG AT THE DEST, A RECENT HISTORY OF BOTH RADIOS BEING INTERMITTENT (BUT THESE WERE REMOVED/REPLACED AND GAVE NO PROBS DURING THE FLT INCLUDING CONTACTS WITH MOFFETT TWR, MRY APCH). THE UNUSUAL PROTRUSION OF THE TCA ON ITS WESTERN EDGE IS SLIGHTLY UNUSUAL. A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR IS THE INABILITY OF APCH TO SKIN PAINT AND MUST RELY ON XPONDERS. I DISCOVERED THE PROB AFTER LNDG WHEN MOFFETT TWR GAVE ME A MESSAGE TO CALL SUPVR BAY TRACON. I WAS NOTIFIED THAT I HAD BEEN TRACKED BY BAY APCH. TO QUOTE THE FAA, I HAD 'NICKED' THEIR TCA AND WILL BE GNDED 60 DAYS ('AUTOMATIC SINCE CERRITOS'). THIS ACTION AND RESULTING DISCUSSIONS HAS NOW MADE ME UNDERSTAND WHY I HAVE HEARD PLTS DISCUSSING PROS AND CONS OF TURNING OFF THEIR XPONDERS (ON 1200) WHEN THEY ARE IN AREAS WHERE SUCH VIOLATIONS ARE POSSIBLE. CORRECTIVE ACTION: I STRONGLY FEEL FAA/APCH RADAR SHOULD HAVE 'SKIN PAINT' CAPABILITY. MY POINT IS OUR ATC SYS SHOULD NOT DEPEND ON COOPERATIVE SYSTEMS SUCH AS XPONDERS. ONLY THE INNOCENT GETS HURT FOR USING IT. UNCOOPERATIVE TARGETS CAN USE IT AS THEY DESIRE. RADAR WAS SPECIFICALLY DEVELOPED TO DETECT HOSTILE, DANGEROUS, AND UNCOOPERATIVE TARGETS. XPONDERS WERE DEVELOPED TO TELL WHO THE FRIENDS ARE (IFF=IDENT FRIEND/FOE) AND THEY STILL DO, BUT NOW WE CAN'T LOCATE THE FOES. I FEEL THIS PROB IS CLEARLY STATED IN A RECENT AVIATION WEEK AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY ARTICLE WHICH SAID LAX APCH WAS USING AN ARMY ARTILLERY SPOTTING RADAR FOR THIS PURPOSE ON A TRIAL BASIS. THE FAA COULD DO A FAMILY TREE ANALYSIS TO CLEARLY DEFINE THIS HAZARD IF IT IS NOT OBVIOUS FROM HISTORY OR THE ABOVE DISCUSSION. CORRECTIVE ACTION: TAKE ACTION TO GET BETTER COOPERATION FROM ATC. FREQUENT PLT COMPLAINTS AT 4 CLUBS I BELONG TO AND MANY FLYING MAGAZINES INDICATE THIS IS A FREQUENT OCCURRENCE. A SHORT CAUTION IN FLT AND AHEAD OF TIME WOULD ALLOW ME TO DOUBLE CHK POS AND NOT WONDER IF A PARALLEL FLT MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN CONFUSED WITH MINE.

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