Narrative:

The SERFR2 arrival into sfo is a setup for a class B airspace violation. There is the potential to fly below the class B airspace between epick and eddyy and again between eddyy and swels; all while remaining on the VNAV path profile. The speeds printed on the arrival all exceed 200 kts which is the limit for operating below class B airspace.see the problem here? You can fly the arrival as published and violate the speed limit below class B airspace or you can slow down for the airspace and violate the published speeds on the arrival. Why would the FAA design a procedure like this? It's even more disconcerting when you don't know it's coming. For example; consider a case where you're in LNAV/VNAV; exactly where you're supposed to be; flying the published speeds on the arrival; and ATC says; 'XXX be advised you're exiting class B airspace. You will re-enter in two miles.' what are we supposed to do at that point? It's too late to slow down and that's an instant violation if anyone cares to press the issue. The published altitudes on the BSR3 arrival (the pre-nextgen non-RNAV version of the SERFR2) are more appropriate and keep you within class B airspace.additionally; the SERFR2 almost always leads into the tipp toe visual runway 28L approach. The published altitude at menlo on the tipp toe visual says '5000 for class B airspace.' but the published altitude at menlo on the SERFR2 arrival says '4000.' the bottom of class B airspace at menlo is at 2500. So we have a charting disparity between the arrival and approach for the same intersection; and the note on the approach '5000 for class B airspace' is incorrect. We've seen many cases around the country where the mad push to install nextgen procedures creates some unintended consequences. This appears to be another one.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain reported airspace; airspeed; and altitude conflicts associated with the SERFR2 arrival into SFO.

Narrative: The SERFR2 arrival into SFO is a setup for a Class B airspace violation. There is the potential to fly below the Class B airspace between EPICK and EDDYY and again between EDDYY and SWELS; all while remaining on the VNAV path profile. The speeds printed on the arrival all exceed 200 kts which is the limit for operating below Class B airspace.See the problem here? You can fly the arrival as published and violate the speed limit below Class B airspace or you can slow down for the airspace and violate the published speeds on the arrival. Why would the FAA design a procedure like this? It's even more disconcerting when you don't know it's coming. For example; consider a case where you're in LNAV/VNAV; exactly where you're supposed to be; flying the published speeds on the arrival; and ATC says; 'XXX be advised you're exiting Class B airspace. You will re-enter in two miles.' What are we supposed to do at that point? It's too late to slow down and that's an instant violation if anyone cares to press the issue. The published altitudes on the BSR3 arrival (the pre-NextGen non-RNAV version of the SERFR2) are more appropriate and keep you within Class B airspace.Additionally; the SERFR2 almost always leads into the Tipp Toe Visual Runway 28L approach. The published altitude at MENLO on the Tipp Toe Visual says '5000 for Class B airspace.' But the published altitude at MENLO on the SERFR2 arrival says '4000.' The bottom of Class B airspace at MENLO is at 2500. So we have a charting disparity between the arrival and approach for the same intersection; and the note on the approach '5000 for Class B airspace' is incorrect. We've seen many cases around the country where the mad push to install NextGen procedures creates some unintended consequences. This appears to be another one.

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.