37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 373200 |
Time | |
Date | 199706 |
Day | Mon |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : sfo |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 1500 msl bound upper : 1500 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : oak tower : sfo artcc : ztl |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737-500 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other Other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : visual arrival other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | MD-11 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other Other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : visual arrival other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 3600 flight time type : 390 |
ASRS Report | 373200 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : clearance non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Situations | |
ATC Facility | procedure or policy : unspecified |
Narrative:
We were flight phx-sfo landing runway 28L at sfo, an MD11 landing runway 28R at sfo. Visual approachs in use. We were told to maintain visual separation from MD11, cleared visual approach runway 28L. MD11 came from the west but was cleared via the quiet bridge runway 28R. Because we had radius of turn advantage, we passed MD11 at about the san mateo bridge. MD11 was always in sight, never further aft than 2 O'clock. MD11 flight crew complained to the tower that we passed them. Tower said it was ok -- we were not a heavy. They said it did not matter. On short final, MD11 passed us and landed runway 28R. I don't know if MD11 crew complained formally, but since then it seems sfo has been more strict, ie, telling aircraft to follow one another instead of just saying 'maintain visual separation.' anyway, these procedures need to be standardized and clarified.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR FO RPT ON VISUAL SIMULTANEOUS ARRS AT SFO. RPTR WAS CONCERNED WITH A POSSIBLE VIOLATION FROM THE OTHER ACR THAT COMPLAINED OF THE FO'S ACFT OVERTAKING AND POSSIBLY NOT MAINTAINING A VISUAL ON ACR Y.
Narrative: WE WERE FLT PHX-SFO LNDG RWY 28L AT SFO, AN MD11 LNDG RWY 28R AT SFO. VISUAL APCHS IN USE. WE WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION FROM MD11, CLRED VISUAL APCH RWY 28L. MD11 CAME FROM THE W BUT WAS CLRED VIA THE QUIET BRIDGE RWY 28R. BECAUSE WE HAD RADIUS OF TURN ADVANTAGE, WE PASSED MD11 AT ABOUT THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE. MD11 WAS ALWAYS IN SIGHT, NEVER FURTHER AFT THAN 2 O'CLOCK. MD11 FLC COMPLAINED TO THE TWR THAT WE PASSED THEM. TWR SAID IT WAS OK -- WE WERE NOT A HVY. THEY SAID IT DID NOT MATTER. ON SHORT FINAL, MD11 PASSED US AND LANDED RWY 28R. I DON'T KNOW IF MD11 CREW COMPLAINED FORMALLY, BUT SINCE THEN IT SEEMS SFO HAS BEEN MORE STRICT, IE, TELLING ACFT TO FOLLOW ONE ANOTHER INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING 'MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION.' ANYWAY, THESE PROCS NEED TO BE STANDARDIZED AND CLARIFIED.
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.