Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Rain; 0
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying to HWD airport; I was cleared to the initial approach fix for OAK and accepted the clearance incorrectly. This was due to similar sounding initial fixes for similar runways while flying in IMC with turbulence.While planning the flight from [departure airport] to Hayward (KHWD) I reviewed weather from multiple online sources as well as received a standard weather briefing via the Lockheed Martin Flight Services Garmin Pilot weather report. Weather at departure; enroute; and at the destination at the time of arrival was all forecast to be VFR.I departed and contacted departure and requested VFR flight following to HWD. While enroute we began to see some accumulating clouds. I began a decent [when] it appeared that we could maintain VFR below clouds up ahead. When it became clear that we would not be able to remain VFR below the clouds; I requested an IFR clearance and to climb above the clouds.I was cleared by Center direct to KARNN V301 SUNOL. When handed off to Nor Cal approach I requested the GPS RWY 28L approach and was given a 320 vector and told to descend to 6;000. I was expecting to be taken to JOBUS which has an initial approach altitude of 5;700. I was handed off to another Controller and told them that I was 'level 6;000; 320 heading; with [Hayward information ATIS code].' The controller told me to maintain 6;000 and that I was cleared direct JUPAP for the approach.While flying in IMC with slight to moderate turbulence; I activated the vector to final on my GPS and saw the localizer start to come in. I told the controller that I was established on the localizer and he responded 'Roger' and that he would clear me for the approach as I got closer to JUPAP.While re-reading the approach plate I did not see JUPAP on the plate. I switched back to IFR chart and began to look for both JOBUS and JUPAP. I could not find either. Soon after the controller came on to ask me if I was 'still heading to Hayward.' I responded that I was.Upon landing I realized that JUPAP is the initial fix for Oakland's GPS Runway 28L. The controller had been directing me to Oakland; not my destination of Hayward.This could have been avoided by me vocalizing my confusion and questioning the clearance to JUPAP. I should not have accepted a clearance to a fix I was not familiar with. Additionally; the controller should have noted that the information I provided was for Hayward. When I told him I was established that should have been another clue that I was not aligned for Oakland. Lastly; I do not believe similar runways; both are 28L; should have similar sounding initial fix names.




Synopsis: A General Aviation pilot planned a flight using Lockheed Martin Flight Services Garmin Pilot weather report; while enroute the pilot encountered IMC weather and switched to IFR. When cleared for initial approach the pilot accepted clearance for an incorrect airport due to similar sounding fixes. Both airports have similar runway alignments and similar sounding approach fixes.