Narrative:

On approach to sfo ILS runway 28R was assigned numerous headings and airspds for sequencing traffic. Final assignment before approach clearance was 'intercept localizer, maintain 4000 ft, (160 KIAS assigned previously). Next approach vectored a B747 onto final ahead and above us, then stated we were 'cleared ILS runway 28R use caution 3 1/2 mi in front heavy B747.' we felt this was inadequate spacing and reference TCASII position, began slowing below 160 KIAS toward approach speed in order to establish approximately 5 mi spacing behind the heavy aircraft. We were unable any radio xmissions to bay approach due to frequency saturation regarding this until he noticed us increasing our separation and queried about our speed at 160 KIAS assigned. We responded that we needed more than 3 1/2 mi behind the heavy and slowed to achieve same. We had 5 mi behind the traffic when they touched down. Controller scolded us that we had upset his plan and continued his harangue until we switched to tower at the marker. We felt his priorities were something other than safe traffic separation and manner less than professional. After several trips into sfo in recent months I can quote verbatim no less than 6 unprofessional remarks by the local controllers (ground, tower approach). We have noticed a propensity to respond to innocuous questions with a smart-assed remark. This kind of attitude can be very dangerous in aviation and has no place here. I suspect leadership...weak or incompetent supervision at this facility that allows this to continue.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 CREW WAS SPACED TOO CLOSE TO A B747 AHEAD.

Narrative: ON APCH TO SFO ILS RWY 28R WAS ASSIGNED NUMEROUS HEADINGS AND AIRSPDS FOR SEQUENCING TFC. FINAL ASSIGNMENT BEFORE APCH CLRNC WAS 'INTERCEPT LOC, MAINTAIN 4000 FT, (160 KIAS ASSIGNED PREVIOUSLY). NEXT APCH VECTORED A B747 ONTO FINAL AHEAD AND ABOVE US, THEN STATED WE WERE 'CLRED ILS RWY 28R USE CAUTION 3 1/2 MI IN FRONT HVY B747.' WE FELT THIS WAS INADEQUATE SPACING AND REF TCASII POS, BEGAN SLOWING BELOW 160 KIAS TOWARD APCH SPD IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH APPROX 5 MI SPACING BEHIND THE HVY ACFT. WE WERE UNABLE ANY RADIO XMISSIONS TO BAY APCH DUE TO FREQ SATURATION REGARDING THIS UNTIL HE NOTICED US INCREASING OUR SEPARATION AND QUERIED ABOUT OUR SPD AT 160 KIAS ASSIGNED. WE RESPONDED THAT WE NEEDED MORE THAN 3 1/2 MI BEHIND THE HVY AND SLOWED TO ACHIEVE SAME. WE HAD 5 MI BEHIND THE TFC WHEN THEY TOUCHED DOWN. CTLR SCOLDED US THAT WE HAD UPSET HIS PLAN AND CONTINUED HIS HARANGUE UNTIL WE SWITCHED TO TWR AT THE MARKER. WE FELT HIS PRIORITIES WERE SOMETHING OTHER THAN SAFE TFC SEPARATION AND MANNER LESS THAN PROFESSIONAL. AFTER SEVERAL TRIPS INTO SFO IN RECENT MONTHS I CAN QUOTE VERBATIM NO LESS THAN 6 UNPROFESSIONAL REMARKS BY THE LCL CTLRS (GND, TWR APCH). WE HAVE NOTICED A PROPENSITY TO RESPOND TO INNOCUOUS QUESTIONS WITH A SMART-ASSED REMARK. THIS KIND OF ATTITUDE CAN BE VERY DANGEROUS IN AVIATION AND HAS NO PLACE HERE. I SUSPECT LEADERSHIP...WEAK OR INCOMPETENT SUPERVISION AT THIS FACILITY THAT ALLOWS THIS TO CONTINUE.

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.