Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X on BODGA1 Arrival which is a descend via with confusing procedures. Assigned 'Landing 28 Left' but flew the routing for 'Landing 28 Right'; by flying wrong route aircraft entered depart sector without coordination. Departures are climbing to 15;000 and this aircraft was in the airspace at 11;000 without coordination. This happens approximately 25 to 20 times a week and no one is doing anything about it. I have reported to management that this is dangerous and nothing is done.The Descend VIA routes for SFO are poorly designed. They conflict with other airspace; have restrictions that are in violation for CFR's (below B airspace assigned speeds greater than 200K); have altitude restrictions that don't contain the aircraft in B airspace once entering; have confusing transition names (landing West means fly the east route and Landing East means fly the West route). No Lost comm procedures for a route that splits 8 miles from center boundary yet center has no way of knowing which routing the aircraft should be on. Management is not attempting to fix the problems because they refuse admit there is a problem. Instead they keep putting band aids on a poorly designed procedure. Safety taking a back seat making these routes look like 3 years of planning was time well spent.


Second narrative: On the BDEGA One RNAV arrival into SFO; FMS was setup for the runway 28R transition after CORKK waypoint. ATIS stated runway 28L or 28R were the runways in use. Since the FBO is off of runway 28R; that was the preloaded transition after CORKK waypoint. Just prior to CORKK; ATC announced to expect runway 28L. As I was rebriefing the copilot about landing and the planned runway exit; we passed CORKK waypoint on the way to FINSH waypoint for runway 28R. I reviewed the STAR and queried the copilot about the wrong runway transition and to report to ATC. ATC replied we were supposed to fly the runway 28L transition to BRIXX waypoint not CORKK and to continue on our present course for the 28R transition. A frequency change was given to the next controller with no other comments. Flight continued in VMC for the Quiet Bridge Visual to runway 28R without further incident. It is imperative to verify the correct data is loaded into the FMS prior to commencing a crew brief to avoid thinking about what you may normally be issued as opposed what you actually are assigned.


Synopsis: NCT Controller described how procedures into SFO are allegedly not correct. Aircraft are going to the wrong runway; leaving the Bravo airspace; and are violating speed restrictions below the Bravo. Pilot of aircraft described how they set up for one runway and then were assigned another; which led to confusion in the cockpit.