Narrative:

The second aircraft involved was an air carrier B airlines medium large transport making a visibility approach to runway 28R at sfo. I requested a full ILS approach to sfo from bay approach control and was cleared for an ILS 28L approach. We were advised approaching the OM that the medium large transport was cleared for a parallel visibility approach to 28R and that he had us in sight and that he would maintain visibility sep from us. We saw the medium large transport as he closed on us approaching the OM and he was very high above the G/south and behind us at that point. As we continued our approach to 28L at about 800' the medium large transport made a rapid steep descent at an airspeed or ground speed that must have been 70-80 KTS faster than us and suddenly passed us about 500' to the right and about 200' higher. We observed his approach ahead of us and it seemed to us that he would have to go around because the airplane that landed ahead of him on 28R had not yet cleared the runway as medium large transport crossed the 28R threshold. However, the other airplane just barely cleared 28R as medium large transport touched down long or even beyond the T/D zone. We were still about 300-400' AGL as medium large transport landed. I consider that the type of flying displayed by the medium large transport pilot to be totally irresponsible and probably in violation of far's and violated his visibility approach restriction to maintain visibility contact and sep from us. How could he have maintained visibility sep from us after he passed us up going like a streak of lightning? We were on a full instrument approach with ATC responsibility for proper IFR sep at all times and I did not accept any responsibility for sep from anyone else. Someday lots of people are going to be killed as a result of a midair collision by airplanes flying wing tip-to-wing tip to sfo 28R/left, or by some irresponsible cowboy like that medium large transport pilot.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR-MLG FAILS TO KEEP PRECEDING ACR-LGT IN SIGHT DURING APCH TO PARALLEL RWYS. MLG ALSO FAILED TO FOLLOW STANDARD OPERATING PROC.

Narrative: THE SECOND ACFT INVOLVED WAS AN ACR B AIRLINES MLG MAKING A VIS APCH TO RWY 28R AT SFO. I REQUESTED A FULL ILS APCH TO SFO FROM BAY APCH CTL AND WAS CLRED FOR AN ILS 28L APCH. WE WERE ADVISED APCHING THE OM THAT THE MLG WAS CLRED FOR A PARALLEL VIS APCH TO 28R AND THAT HE HAD US IN SIGHT AND THAT HE WOULD MAINTAIN VIS SEP FROM US. WE SAW THE MLG AS HE CLOSED ON US APCHING THE OM AND HE WAS VERY HIGH ABOVE THE G/S AND BEHIND US AT THAT POINT. AS WE CONTINUED OUR APCH TO 28L AT ABOUT 800' THE MLG MADE A RAPID STEEP DSCNT AT AN AIRSPD OR GND SPD THAT MUST HAVE BEEN 70-80 KTS FASTER THAN US AND SUDDENLY PASSED US ABOUT 500' TO THE RIGHT AND ABOUT 200' HIGHER. WE OBSERVED HIS APCH AHEAD OF US AND IT SEEMED TO US THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO GO AROUND BECAUSE THE AIRPLANE THAT LANDED AHEAD OF HIM ON 28R HAD NOT YET CLRED THE RWY AS MLG CROSSED THE 28R THRESHOLD. HOWEVER, THE OTHER AIRPLANE JUST BARELY CLRED 28R AS MLG TOUCHED DOWN LONG OR EVEN BEYOND THE T/D ZONE. WE WERE STILL ABOUT 300-400' AGL AS MLG LANDED. I CONSIDER THAT THE TYPE OF FLYING DISPLAYED BY THE MLG PLT TO BE TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND PROBABLY IN VIOLATION OF FAR'S AND VIOLATED HIS VIS APCH RESTRICTION TO MAINTAIN VIS CONTACT AND SEP FROM US. HOW COULD HE HAVE MAINTAINED VIS SEP FROM US AFTER HE PASSED US UP GOING LIKE A STREAK OF LIGHTNING? WE WERE ON A FULL INSTRUMENT APCH WITH ATC RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPER IFR SEP AT ALL TIMES AND I DID NOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR SEP FROM ANYONE ELSE. SOMEDAY LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE KILLED AS A RESULT OF A MIDAIR COLLISION BY AIRPLANES FLYING WING TIP-TO-WING TIP TO SFO 28R/L, OR BY SOME IRRESPONSIBLE COWBOY LIKE THAT MLG PLT.

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.