A321 pilot reported executing two ATC-directed go-arounds at sfo; and expressed concern that sfo con...

Narrative:

While flying a visual approach to runway 28R at sfo; tower cleared an aircraft for takeoff from the crossing runways. The tower asked us to slow to final approach speed; but we were already at final approach speed. The tower then told us to go around. A normal go-around was flown followed by vectors to an ILS 28R. We were vectored only 3 miles behind the next landing aircraft. The aircraft in front was asked to expedite exiting the runway. They seemed to be confused by the request and failed to exit the runway in a timely manner. The tower then told us to make another go-around. A normal go-around was flown followed by an ILS to 28R with a normal landing.I feel this event was caused by ATC pushing the limits of the volume of traffic they can safely handle; coupled with poor judgment of the tower controller; as well as the tight vectoring and separation provided by the approach controller.suggestions - review and training needs to be provided to ATC of realistic separation for landing aircraft as well as proper spacing when clearing aircraft to depart from crossing runways.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A321 pilot reported executing two ATC-directed go-arounds at SFO; and expressed concern that SFO controllers were attempting to maximize operations at the expense of safety.

Narrative: While flying a visual approach to runway 28R at SFO; Tower cleared an aircraft for takeoff from the crossing runways. The Tower asked us to slow to final approach speed; but we were already at final approach speed. The Tower then told us to go around. A normal go-around was flown followed by vectors to an ILS 28R. We were vectored only 3 miles behind the next landing aircraft. The aircraft in front was asked to expedite exiting the runway. They seemed to be confused by the request and failed to exit the runway in a timely manner. The Tower then told us to make another go-around. A normal go-around was flown followed by an ILS to 28R with a normal landing.I feel this event was caused by ATC pushing the limits of the volume of traffic they can safely handle; coupled with poor judgment of the Tower Controller; as well as the tight vectoring and separation provided by the Approach Controller.Suggestions - Review and training needs to be provided to ATC of realistic separation for landing aircraft as well as proper spacing when clearing aircraft to depart from crossing runways.

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	1458875
Time
Date	201706
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	SFO.Tower
State Reference	CA
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	A321
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	Takeoff
Person 1
Function	Other / Unknown
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Ground Conflict Less Severe

A321 pilot reported executing two ATC-directed go-arounds at sfo; and expressed concern that sfo controllers were attempting to maximize operations at the expense of safety.