trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Take the visual, fly the ILS anyway.
Oh Lufthansa….or Oh SFO controllers?
- Thread starter Wardogg
- Start date
Wardogg
Meat Popsicle
I mean you’re not wrong. Until the FO turns you in for violation of company SOPs.
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
It isn't just SFO (tho obviously NorCal and SFO Tower are having serious issues as of late), a lot of places had controllers certify when there was no traffic. Now there is a lot of traffic and from the ATC side, I hear that legacy pilots are now commonly making a lot of mistakes that used to be rare sans for the occasional regional jet while regional jets are making weekend warrior-type mistakes all the time. Wrong crew + wrong controller is probably going to be at the root of the next fatal US 121 accident is my bet, if these trends continue. And they show no signs of slowing down...
On the flip side, a lot of controllers are by the book, others have no problem asking pilots to bend rules if it keeps things going (like discouraging PIREPS when the "visual" for the 28s is taking planes thru some clouds). A complex airport to operate at with all that stuff and the limited space, but there have been very few accidents relative to US airports with similar movement numbers. But I have seen 10+ go-arounds at SFO in a single day more times than I can even begin to recall lol.
Either way, to me this seems like a good example of people not caring about the gravity of the decisions they make at work and just thinking "I'm not dealing with this, divert". I could be totally wrong of course, however, I find it hard to believe they couldn't squeeze in 1 ILS to avoid this diversion that whole time with some coordination and penalty vectors. A diversion is a big deal, especially at a place like OAK where whatever airline is doing 2x monthly summertime flights to the Azroes on behalf of Azores Airlines and a Hawaiian A330 to HNL are the only regular pax widebody flights remaining. No staff over there, no contractor like in the Norwegian days that can be hired to help out, very little in the way of people trained to operate widebody GSE, ect. Had the crew timed out in OAK, it would have been a mess. At the very least, I'm sure tons of people misconnected on both ends of that flight with the delay. Just seems pretty unprofessional as far as the recording goes. I'd like to think a lot of ATC would have communicated differently.
While I totally agree, it is interesting how SOPs seem to be followed at an airport like SFO that has a lot fo company-specific special stuff at many carriers. A lot of Asian airlines are told not to depart 19L/R, and while I have seen those carriers flat out cancel or sit by the 10s for 3-4 hours hoping for a window where the winds can get them out, I've seen those same carriers blast off into the Millbrae hills like it was nothing other times. Frontier and a few others have SOPs that ban the rare landings on the 01s at SFO, yet they never seem to divert or cancel when the 01s are in use for arrival. Certain airlines accept side steps all the time within a few mile final for the 28s, but friends at those carriers tell me they aren't supposed to do that as they wouldn't have time to do it properly by SOP.
On the flip side, a lot of controllers are by the book, others have no problem asking pilots to bend rules if it keeps things going (like discouraging PIREPS when the "visual" for the 28s is taking planes thru some clouds). A complex airport to operate at with all that stuff and the limited space, but there have been very few accidents relative to US airports with similar movement numbers. But I have seen 10+ go-arounds at SFO in a single day more times than I can even begin to recall lol.
Either way, to me this seems like a good example of people not caring about the gravity of the decisions they make at work and just thinking "I'm not dealing with this, divert". I could be totally wrong of course, however, I find it hard to believe they couldn't squeeze in 1 ILS to avoid this diversion that whole time with some coordination and penalty vectors. A diversion is a big deal, especially at a place like OAK where whatever airline is doing 2x monthly summertime flights to the Azroes on behalf of Azores Airlines and a Hawaiian A330 to HNL are the only regular pax widebody flights remaining. No staff over there, no contractor like in the Norwegian days that can be hired to help out, very little in the way of people trained to operate widebody GSE, ect. Had the crew timed out in OAK, it would have been a mess. At the very least, I'm sure tons of people misconnected on both ends of that flight with the delay. Just seems pretty unprofessional as far as the recording goes. I'd like to think a lot of ATC would have communicated differently.
Last edited:
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
Aiye caramba, loss of separation between an Air Canada departing 10L and a UA landing 19L (looks like a late go-around from the radar vid I was shown) about 3 hours ago. A new SFO video from VAS Aviation tomorrow I bet LOL! It happened right in front of Air Force One, too, which is parked on Lima near the 10L/19L intersection.
///AMG
Well-Known Member
I wonder if this was a language barrier thing? Because if it were me in that plane, there would be no question that the "conversation" is not over. ATC is not in charge, this isn't how this works. If I ask for an estimated delay time, you'd damn well better give me one the first time I ask for it.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Of course.
tcco94
Future GTA VI Pilot
Yeah, could have completely declared a fuel emergency and state intentions to go to the FAF and I’m landing. I’m not saying I’d have the balls to do it, but if he did I’d sure support it
Boots2Wings
Just happy to be here.
Tbf, only DFW gets me agitated. SFO is an easy day
God help you if you dont know your gate/spot at the top of the hill….
God help you if you dont know your gate/spot at the top of the hill….
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
ATC asked them if they could accept visual spacing with the traffic in front of them. They said no.
So Lufthansa is asking for an ILS with full separation from ATC. Basically, as if they are IMC.
Yeah, it's gon be a while.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
But that's not the point. They could have taken a visual anytime. Their procedures (apparently) require BOTH an ILS approach and ILS-in-IMC spacing from aircraft while on said approach.
Declaring an emergency and going direct FAF is basically taking the visual.
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
From my understanding there was a mix up and Lufthansa couldn’t accept visual separation, not a visual approach. This meant the spacing requirement was greater for Lufthansa and at this point there was no gaps big enough to fit them. As for what the rest of the traffic in the airspace looked like I have no idea. I haven’t watched the video yet just remember seeing that in a discussion somewhere amongst controllers.
Inverted
mmmmmm wine
Air Canada has a history of doing that. They damn near landed on us because they lined up for the taxiway instead of 28R. Tower had to tell them to go around, they were fat dumb and happy and almost killed everyone.
Inverted
mmmmmm wine
To vector him around for 15 minutes then tell him it was going to be another 15 minutes or whatever, AFTER this airplane was flying for half a day, is simply unacceptable. This wasn't an unscheduled arrival. It is a major airport with approaches and guess what, after Asiana 214 and Air Canada almost landed on a VX A320 some years ago, there are tons of carriers that regularly fly into SFO who can't accept visual approaches. I am still with with the flight crew here. Don't ask me if I can maintain visual separation with the aircraft in front of me, that is the controller's job. The crew probably didn't want to accept a rabbit hole clearance after telling them they needed the ILS.
Guy got snippy with me for it the other day at like 1am. I’m glad I actually have restraint and didn’t tell him “you’re not doing anything else right now anyway, chill.”
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
Visual seperation on parellels allows for less separation. No vis Sep, means normal spacing. Whether you’re on the ILS or a visual approach.
If there was a mixup on either end, then ATC ran them tight thinking they would maintain visual Sep with the aircraft on the parallel. That’s when it was discovered they couldn’t and they got sent around (correctly per the rules). As for the holding and divert after I can’t comment on because I don’t know what else was going on
Inverted
mmmmmm wine
There was no mention of parallel traffic or pairing traffic to keep visual of. They simply said they could not accept a visual approach and when asked if they could maintain visual separation with traffic ahead, they said no per company policy. They were punished for it IMHO.
tcco94
Future GTA VI Pilot
Oh I’m sure they could take the visual and just fly the ILS like a lot of us do, but obviously that’s a SOP violation for them. So they could get away with this nonsense in an emergency situation. The whole point of this is because it’s a violation of their SOP. I’m just saying an emergency to get vectors to the ILS or visual would have been totally within reason for what this controller is doing, imo. Easier to say that behind a keyboard though.
tcco94
Future GTA VI Pilot
No one was arguing about the wait. Did you bother to watch the video? When they waited almost 20 minutes and asked for an update ATC said “this conversation is over” then forced them to divert because they can’t be bothered outside of their bubble of expectations. I don’t even understand how an actual pilot could defend ATC on this one. But if there was a person - I assumed it was you