Narrative:

After cleared for the bdega one star and established in the descent (clearance was 'descend via...') norcal approach informed us to expect runway 28L at ksfo and runway 28R is on request. We were level at the final altitude of 11;000 feet MSL and 1 NM past corkk intersection we failed to confirm that runway 28L was programmed in the FMS. As a result the FMS directed the aircraft toward the routing for runway 28R; which was previously loaded in the FMS by the crew. Norcal approach queried us to confirm we are on the runway 28L transition and issued a right turn to heading 140. We updated the FMS with runway 28L; the remainder of the flight transpired with nothing significant to report. The flight terminated as scheduled at ksfo.heading into sfo is really a pilot nightmare. It is a general consensus that no matter what you load in the FMS you will get a different clearance. For example during this arrival and approach we had the ILS to 28R programmed and the quiet bridge visual approach programmed in and yet we got a third approach issued to us (as is the norm). This causes distraction in the cockpit during the descent and arrival phase of flight that is already busy with other required checklists. As a prudent pilot; I have an approach set up and an arrival and approach briefed at the top of descent so that both pilots can focus on other required duties. When the arrival and approach info changes from what is expected it causes undue stress and distraction in the cockpit which further leads to pilot error. Frequently on arrival to sfo; the ATIS lists three approaches in use. It would be helpful if expected arrival and approach information could be pushed out to pilots sooner; by the top of descent from cruise altitude so that the cockpit could be already configured for descent and both pilots can be focused on flying the aircraft along the required flight path instead of having one pilot reprogramming and the other pilot now briefing a new approach during the arrival phase. With most commercial traffic having access to digital media it would be helpful to have a pre departure clearance clearance sent one hour out from landing issuing the arrival clearance; or at a minimum have the center pass the expected arrival approach to aircraft prior to transitioning into the arrival phase. With sfo being a melting pot of aviation and with english as a second language for most international carriers; giving more time to understand the expected arrival and approach would benefit many.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Descending on the BDEGA ONE STAR into KSFO; corporate jet flight crew received clearance to Runway 28L which had not been programmed in the FMS. After aircraft turned toward routing for Runway 28R; ATC issued vectors and crew reprogrammed the FMS. Ongoing problems associated with changes to expected routing on KSFO STARS were noted by the reporter.

Narrative: After cleared for the BDEGA ONE star and established in the descent (clearance was 'descend via...') Norcal Approach informed us to expect Runway 28L at KSFO and Runway 28R is on request. We were level at the final altitude of 11;000 feet MSL and 1 NM past CORKK intersection we failed to confirm that Runway 28L was programmed in the FMS. As a result the FMS directed the aircraft toward the routing for Runway 28R; which was previously loaded in the FMS by the crew. Norcal Approach queried us to confirm we are on the Runway 28L transition and issued a right turn to heading 140. We updated the FMS with Runway 28L; the remainder of the flight transpired with nothing significant to report. The flight terminated as scheduled at KSFO.Heading into SFO is really a pilot nightmare. It is a general consensus that no matter what you load in the FMS you will get a different clearance. For example during this arrival and approach we had the ILS to 28R programmed and the Quiet Bridge Visual approach programmed in and yet we got a third approach issued to us (as is the norm). This causes distraction in the cockpit during the descent and arrival phase of flight that is already busy with other required checklists. As a prudent pilot; I have an approach set up and an arrival and approach briefed at the top of descent so that both pilots can focus on other required duties. When the arrival and approach info changes from what is expected it causes undue stress and distraction in the cockpit which further leads to pilot error. Frequently on arrival to SFO; the ATIS lists three approaches in use. It would be helpful if expected arrival and approach information could be pushed out to pilots sooner; by the top of descent from cruise altitude so that the cockpit could be already configured for descent and both pilots can be focused on flying the aircraft along the required flight path instead of having one pilot reprogramming and the other pilot now briefing a new approach during the arrival phase. With most commercial traffic having access to digital media it would be helpful to have a PDC clearance sent one hour out from landing issuing the arrival clearance; or at a minimum have the center pass the expected arrival approach to aircraft prior to transitioning into the arrival phase. With SFO being a melting pot of aviation and with English as a second language for most international carriers; giving more time to understand the expected arrival and approach would benefit many.

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.