Narrative:

Business trip from hio to sql. Rdd-sql leg flown by lower time pilot with reporter serving in navigation role due to more familiarity with sfo bay area airports and procedures. Travis turned us loose south of concord airport with no instructions for changeover to bay approach. One contact attempt was made to bay approach by reporter with no response. I made decision to transit hwd air traffic area from east to west, made contact with tower at hwd and was cleared through. On west side of area, received ok to switch frequencys. I instructed pilot to head for the highest span of the san mateo bridge, knowing san carlos tower asks traffic from that direction (VFR) to report there first. A quick glance at sectional chart indicated TCA at sfo (sfc to 8000 segment) started at bridge. Therefore, we would be where san carlos tower wanted us--at mid-span of bridge, we were below 1500' floor of TCA segment, and we were south of sfc-8000 TCA segment. On contact with tower (we were about 1/4 mi south of high span of san mateo bridge at 1000'), we were asked to squawk 5200 followed by a command to 'turn left 90 degrees immediately.' we were already in a left turn to take up a heading to the antenna of radio station knbr anyway, so I confirmed that fact. At ground control's request, were told to call the tower. Controller who instructed us with the immediate 90 degree turn said we were 1 mi inside the sfc-8000 segment of the TCA and right at the LOM for runway 28 at sfo. At first I was disbelieving. I knew we were supposed to be at mid-span and I had verified earlier that point was outside the TCA. Upon closer examination of the chart, however, it was apparent the bold magenta line that I mistook for the TCA boundary was in fact only a depiction of the san mateo bridge. Furthermore, it was inside the TCA at the point I reported to the tower. And, I was not at mid-span, but instead at high-span. The bridge is constructed in such a way that a person would think of the span as the bridge between approachs. And the approachs, especially from the east, are quite a distance. Mid-span is about 2 mi back to the east and out of the sfc-8000 TCA! So, I was guilty as charged. This could have been prevented by me checking the boundaries more carefully and not assuming location of the sfc-8000 TCA and mid-span were what they were. The chart is hard to read, but it's there. Also, using the ATC system--I should have established contact with bay approach and received flight following.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA UNAUTH PENETRATION OF SFO TCA.

Narrative: BUSINESS TRIP FROM HIO TO SQL. RDD-SQL LEG FLOWN BY LOWER TIME PLT WITH RPTR SERVING IN NAV ROLE DUE TO MORE FAMILIARITY WITH SFO BAY AREA ARPTS AND PROCS. TRAVIS TURNED US LOOSE S OF CONCORD ARPT WITH NO INSTRUCTIONS FOR CHANGEOVER TO BAY APCH. ONE CONTACT ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO BAY APCH BY RPTR WITH NO RESPONSE. I MADE DECISION TO TRANSIT HWD ATA FROM E TO W, MADE CONTACT WITH TWR AT HWD AND WAS CLRED THROUGH. ON W SIDE OF AREA, RECEIVED OK TO SWITCH FREQS. I INSTRUCTED PLT TO HEAD FOR THE HIGHEST SPAN OF THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE, KNOWING SAN CARLOS TWR ASKS TFC FROM THAT DIRECTION (VFR) TO RPT THERE FIRST. A QUICK GLANCE AT SECTIONAL CHART INDICATED TCA AT SFO (SFC TO 8000 SEGMENT) STARTED AT BRIDGE. THEREFORE, WE WOULD BE WHERE SAN CARLOS TWR WANTED US--AT MID-SPAN OF BRIDGE, WE WERE BELOW 1500' FLOOR OF TCA SEGMENT, AND WE WERE S OF SFC-8000 TCA SEGMENT. ON CONTACT WITH TWR (WE WERE ABOUT 1/4 MI S OF HIGH SPAN OF SAN MATEO BRIDGE AT 1000'), WE WERE ASKED TO SQUAWK 5200 FOLLOWED BY A COMMAND TO 'TURN LEFT 90 DEGS IMMEDIATELY.' WE WERE ALREADY IN A LEFT TURN TO TAKE UP A HDG TO THE ANTENNA OF RADIO STATION KNBR ANYWAY, SO I CONFIRMED THAT FACT. AT GND CTL'S REQUEST, WERE TOLD TO CALL THE TWR. CTLR WHO INSTRUCTED US WITH THE IMMEDIATE 90 DEG TURN SAID WE WERE 1 MI INSIDE THE SFC-8000 SEGMENT OF THE TCA AND RIGHT AT THE LOM FOR RWY 28 AT SFO. AT FIRST I WAS DISBELIEVING. I KNEW WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE AT MID-SPAN AND I HAD VERIFIED EARLIER THAT POINT WAS OUTSIDE THE TCA. UPON CLOSER EXAMINATION OF THE CHART, HOWEVER, IT WAS APPARENT THE BOLD MAGENTA LINE THAT I MISTOOK FOR THE TCA BOUNDARY WAS IN FACT ONLY A DEPICTION OF THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE. FURTHERMORE, IT WAS INSIDE THE TCA AT THE POINT I RPTED TO THE TWR. AND, I WAS NOT AT MID-SPAN, BUT INSTEAD AT HIGH-SPAN. THE BRIDGE IS CONSTRUCTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT A PERSON WOULD THINK OF THE SPAN AS THE BRIDGE BTWN APCHS. AND THE APCHS, ESPECIALLY FROM THE E, ARE QUITE A DISTANCE. MID-SPAN IS ABOUT 2 MI BACK TO THE E AND OUT OF THE SFC-8000 TCA! SO, I WAS GUILTY AS CHARGED. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED BY ME CHKING THE BOUNDARIES MORE CAREFULLY AND NOT ASSUMING LOCATION OF THE SFC-8000 TCA AND MID-SPAN WERE WHAT THEY WERE. THE CHART IS HARD TO READ, BUT IT'S THERE. ALSO, USING THE ATC SYS--I SHOULD HAVE ESTABLISHED CONTACT WITH BAY APCH AND RECEIVED FLT FOLLOWING.

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.