Narrative:

We were on arrival to sfo and given descend via the serfr 2 except maintain 8;000. The ATIS said visual and charted visual approaches were in use. We briefed a visual approach because in my experience we received a charted visual to 28L only about once every few months; if even that often; so we briefed the most likely approach. The controller also did not tell us to expect a charted visual but simply a normal approach. We were then given clearance to continue the descend via below 8;000. Around swels intersection the controller asked if we had the bridges and/or airport in sight and we replied that we had. He then cleared us 'at menlo cleared tipp toe visual 28L.' the approach we had not discussed. The first officer started down to the charted altitude of 4;000 at the bottom of the serfr 2 arrival. I quickly began looking over the charted visual procedure and tried to build the fixes between menlo and the final approach course and at around 4;800 feet mentioned we should probably be at 5;000 feet per the tipp toe visual. We then climbed back up to 5;000 feet and crossed melno at that altitude and continued to the D14.0 oak fix that I had built. In the confusion of which altitude to be at and quickly briefing/setting up the tipp toe visual in the FMS the aircraft overshot the 28L approach course and into the 28R course. I also tried to build a fix to intercept final at 10 miles as the chart appears to show. We noticed the error and quickly corrected back. There was no pairing traffic for landing; therefore we did not come close to any other aircraft and ATC did not say anything about overshooting. Landing was normal after that.the cause of this event was several factors:- not briefing advertised charted visual- ATC not telling us to expect a charted visual- confusion/lack of clarity on which altitude to be at for menlo- not asking which altitude we should be at- preoccupation with the FMS and what the chart was telling us to do when turning to final - brief all applicable approaches (in this case charted and normal visual to 28L)- clarify unclear charted altitudes with ATC- from ATC stand point have the bottom altitude of the serfr arrival and the charted visual altitude match or say 'cross menlo at x;000 feet cleared tipp toe visual' - a textual description for the tipp toe visual would provide beneficial clarity. 'Depart menlo direct to the OAK151 radial at 14 miles. Depart D14OAK fix on a heading of 310 and intercept the 28L/right final approach course as assigned.' - build the tipp toe visual into the FMS

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Regional Jet Captain reported that after being cleared to descend via the SERFR2 arrival to SFO at the SWELS intersection they were cleared the TIPP TOE VISUAL 28L approach which has a 1000 foot higher crossing at MENLO than the SERFR2 and they had started their descent below the crossing altitude.

Narrative: We were on arrival to SFO and given descend via the SERFR 2 except maintain 8;000. The ATIS said visual and charted visual approaches were in use. We briefed a visual approach because in my experience we received a charted visual to 28L only about once every few months; if even that often; so we briefed the most likely approach. The controller also did not tell us to expect a charted visual but simply a normal approach. We were then given clearance to continue the descend via below 8;000. Around SWELS intersection the controller asked if we had the bridges and/or airport in sight and we replied that we had. He then cleared us 'at MENLO cleared TIPP TOE VISUAL 28L.' The approach we had not discussed. The First Officer started down to the charted altitude of 4;000 at the bottom of the SERFR 2 arrival. I quickly began looking over the charted visual procedure and tried to build the fixes between MENLO and the final approach course and at around 4;800 feet mentioned we should probably be at 5;000 feet per the TIPP TOE visual. We then climbed back up to 5;000 feet and crossed MELNO at that altitude and continued to the D14.0 OAK fix that I had built. In the confusion of which altitude to be at and quickly briefing/setting up the TIPP TOE visual in the FMS the aircraft overshot the 28L approach course and into the 28R course. I also tried to build a fix to intercept final at 10 miles as the chart appears to show. We noticed the error and quickly corrected back. There was no pairing traffic for landing; therefore we did not come close to any other aircraft and ATC did not say anything about overshooting. Landing was normal after that.The cause of this event was several factors:- Not briefing advertised charted visual- ATC not telling us to expect a charted visual- Confusion/lack of clarity on which altitude to be at for MENLO- Not asking which altitude we should be at- Preoccupation with the FMS and what the chart was telling us to do when turning to final - Brief all applicable approaches (In this case charted and normal visual to 28L)- Clarify unclear charted altitudes with ATC- From ATC stand point have the bottom altitude of the SERFR arrival and the charted visual altitude match or say 'cross MENLO AT x;000 feet cleared TIPP TOE visual' - A textual description for the TIPP TOE VISUAL would provide beneficial clarity. 'Depart MENLO direct to the OAK151 radial at 14 miles. Depart D14OAK fix on a heading of 310 and intercept the 28L/R final approach course as assigned.' - Build the TIPP TOE visual into the FMS

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.