Wind shear reported on approach-landing runway not relayed to takeoff aircraft by tower.

Attributes
ACN	120715
Time
Date	198908
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sfo
State Reference	CA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	ground other : taxi
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : cfi pilot : commercial pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 215 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 700
ASRS Report	120715
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Deviation
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

As we taxied out to assigned runway 01R we noted that various windsocks and flags indicated a wind different from the ATIS wind of 280 degrees at 14 KTS. Our weight was marginal for the takeoff with any tailwind. Several times we asked ground control for the wind and were repeatedly given 280 degrees at about 15 KTS. Approaching the runway we switched to tower frequency and heard an aircraft cleared to land on runway 28 had also given a wind shear alert: '10 gain at 120'.' we requested runway 28. During taxi we asked the tower why we, as a departing aircraft, were not advised of the wind shear alert. The reply was that no departing aircraft had reported the wind shear yet, so it was only arriving aircraft being alerted. We rechked both departure and arrival ATIS; no wind shear alerts were mentioned. If we had known that wind shear existed anywhere near the airport, we would not even have considered runway 01R for takeoff, and requested 28 form the beginning. It would seem that if wind shear is known to exist anywhere near the airport that everyone should be told about it and not have to find out about it by accident.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WIND SHEAR REPORTED ON APCH-LNDG RWY NOT RELAYED TO TKOF ACFT BY TWR.

Narrative: AS WE TAXIED OUT TO ASSIGNED RWY 01R WE NOTED THAT VARIOUS WINDSOCKS AND FLAGS INDICATED A WIND DIFFERENT FROM THE ATIS WIND OF 280 DEGS AT 14 KTS. OUR WT WAS MARGINAL FOR THE TKOF WITH ANY TAILWIND. SEVERAL TIMES WE ASKED GND CTL FOR THE WIND AND WERE REPEATEDLY GIVEN 280 DEGS AT ABOUT 15 KTS. APCHING THE RWY WE SWITCHED TO TWR FREQ AND HEARD AN ACFT CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 28 HAD ALSO GIVEN A WIND SHEAR ALERT: '10 GAIN AT 120'.' WE REQUESTED RWY 28. DURING TAXI WE ASKED THE TWR WHY WE, AS A DEPARTING ACFT, WERE NOT ADVISED OF THE WIND SHEAR ALERT. THE REPLY WAS THAT NO DEPARTING ACFT HAD RPTED THE WIND SHEAR YET, SO IT WAS ONLY ARRIVING ACFT BEING ALERTED. WE RECHKED BOTH DEP AND ARR ATIS; NO WIND SHEAR ALERTS WERE MENTIONED. IF WE HAD KNOWN THAT WIND SHEAR EXISTED ANYWHERE NEAR THE ARPT, WE WOULD NOT EVEN HAVE CONSIDERED RWY 01R FOR TKOF, AND REQUESTED 28 FORM THE BEGINNING. IT WOULD SEEM THAT IF WIND SHEAR IS KNOWN TO EXIST ANYWHERE NEAR THE ARPT THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE TOLD ABOUT IT AND NOT HAVE TO FIND OUT ABOUT IT BY ACCIDENT.

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.