Parallel visual approachs at sfo.

Attributes
ACN	196014
Time
Date	199111
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : sfo
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 3000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : oak
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 325 flight time type : 2400
ASRS Report	196014
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Air carrier X dtw-sfo. Flight proceeded without incident until handoff from oakland center to bay approach. Initial contact did not provide our flight with the specific runway of 'intended landing.' (why?) we were then given a speed of 210 KTS along with vectors over sfo bay. We, at this point, still have not been assigned a runway of 'intended landing.' we were then vectored 240 degree and told there would be traffic 12 O'clock landing on the left runway. This was our first indication of landing runway. Both aircraft were in close proximity and we could not differentiate which aircraft was our traffic and ultimately we could not see our parallel traffic to runway 28L. Add to this, 50 KTS of wind from the north at 3000 ft, 210 KTS of airspeed and executing parallel approachs (not on the ATIS), it is not difficult to see that our overtake of the parallel traffic would be in excess of 150 KTS. Both aircraft drifted through runway 28L and right locs to avoid conflict. We were then vectored 300 degree to return to the runway 28R localizer. Landing was uneventful. Please make a strong recommendation to stop this type of ATC, especially at sfo!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PARALLEL VISUAL APCHS AT SFO.

Narrative: ACR X DTW-SFO. FLT PROCEEDED WITHOUT INCIDENT UNTIL HDOF FROM OAKLAND CENTER TO BAY APCH. INITIAL CONTACT DID NOT PROVIDE OUR FLT WITH THE SPECIFIC RWY OF 'INTENDED LNDG.' (WHY?) WE WERE THEN GIVEN A SPD OF 210 KTS ALONG WITH VECTORS OVER SFO BAY. WE, AT THIS POINT, STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ASSIGNED A RWY OF 'INTENDED LNDG.' WE WERE THEN VECTORED 240 DEG AND TOLD THERE WOULD BE TFC 12 O'CLOCK LNDG ON THE L RWY. THIS WAS OUR FIRST INDICATION OF LNDG RWY. BOTH ACFT WERE IN CLOSE PROX AND WE COULD NOT DIFFERENTIATE WHICH ACFT WAS OUR TFC AND ULTIMATELY WE COULD NOT SEE OUR PARALLEL TFC TO RWY 28L. ADD TO THIS, 50 KTS OF WIND FROM THE N AT 3000 FT, 210 KTS OF AIRSPD AND EXECUTING PARALLEL APCHS (NOT ON THE ATIS), IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO SEE THAT OUR OVERTAKE OF THE PARALLEL TFC WOULD BE IN EXCESS OF 150 KTS. BOTH ACFT DRIFTED THROUGH RWY 28L AND R LOCS TO AVOID CONFLICT. WE WERE THEN VECTORED 300 DEG TO RETURN TO THE RWY 28R LOC. LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. PLEASE MAKE A STRONG RECOMMENDATION TO STOP THIS TYPE OF ATC, ESPECIALLY AT SFO!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.