Sfo controllers describe a situation where pilots were requesting to circle to another runway due to...

Narrative:

Working lca. Local control (local control) was informed aircraft X (a B737) on final RWY28R could not accept wind and requested a circle to runway 01R for landing. I can not remember wind exactly something like 090012KT. Local control said unable due to aircraft Y (CRJ7) traffic slightly behind for va RWY28L. Aircraft Z (an A380) was in position on runway 28R. Many other aircraft had already circled to runway 01R for landing prior to this and were being set up for this operation landing runway 01R by nct approach sector. We were not advertising this as the approach; we were advertising landing runways 28L and 28R. We were not getting any guidance from tower flm or tmc due to flm coordinating a change to southeast plan and flow times. The situation was very complicated with sfia operations requesting runway checks; some aircraft landing runways 28 and some landing runway 01R. Aircraft going around for wind. Aircraft X said they would continue for 28R and go around 'when they were on the deck' if the wind was still unacceptable. Just a few seconds (maybe 5) later aircraft X declared a go around. Local control issued a 265 heading and a climb to 3100 feet. I advised local control that aircraft X would cut in front of aircraft Y. I coordinated the missed approach with nct sutro sector. Aircraft Y contacted sfo tower and declared a missed approach due to wind. Aircraft Y was issued a 280 heading and a climb to 3000 feet. Both aircraft were told to contact nct departure.do not vector missed approaches in front of a parallel arrival. Our flm was busy with other issues at the time and I feel if we had more tm staffing; the flm could have been monitoring the situation better. As soon as aircraft started landing runways 01; that was a warning sign that we should have already been on a 19/10 southeast plan configuration. The winds had been favoring 19/10 since I had arrived at work.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SFO Controllers describe a situation where pilots were requesting to circle to another runway due to winds; confusion ensues and losses of separation occur. FLM and TMC do not help to change the airport configuration and give direction to the controllers.

Narrative: Working LCA. Local Control (LC) was informed Aircraft X (A B737) on final RWY28R could not accept wind and requested a circle to RWY 01R for landing. I can not remember wind exactly something like 090012KT. LC said unable due to Aircraft Y (CRJ7) traffic slightly behind for VA RWY28L. Aircraft Z (An A380) was in position on RWY 28R. Many other aircraft had already circled to RWY 01R for landing prior to this and were being set up for this operation landing RWY 01R by NCT Approach Sector. We were not advertising this as the approach; we were advertising landing RWYS 28L and 28R. We were not getting any guidance from Tower FLM or TMC due to FLM coordinating a change to SE plan and flow times. The situation was very complicated with SFIA operations requesting runway checks; some aircraft landing RWYS 28 and some landing RWY 01R. Aircraft going around for wind. Aircraft X said they would continue for 28R and go around 'when they were on the deck' if the wind was still unacceptable. Just a few seconds (maybe 5) later Aircraft X declared a go around. LC issued a 265 heading and a climb to 3100 feet. I advised LC that Aircraft X would cut in front of Aircraft Y. I coordinated the missed approach with NCT Sutro Sector. Aircraft Y contacted SFO TWR and declared a missed approach due to wind. Aircraft Y was issued a 280 heading and a climb to 3000 feet. Both aircraft were told to contact NCT Departure.Do not vector missed approaches in front of a parallel arrival. Our FLM was busy with other issues at the time and I feel if we had more TM staffing; the FLM could have been monitoring the situation better. As soon as aircraft started landing RWYS 01; that was a warning sign that we should have already been on a 19/10 SE Plan configuration. The winds had been favoring 19/10 since I had arrived at work.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1224780
Time
Date	201412
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	SFO.Airport
State Reference	CA
Environment
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Large Transport
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Local Handoff / Assist
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Experience	Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 23
Person 2
Function	Local
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Experience	Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 14
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Sfo controllers describe a situation where pilots were requesting to circle to another runway due to winds; confusion ensues and losses of separation occur. Flm and tmc do not help to change the airport configuration and give direction to the controllers.