Narrative:

Norcal cleared us tipp toe visual runway 28L sfo. Norcal cleared aircraft Y visual runway 28R. We never acquired visual contact with aircraft Y. Norcal stated aircraft Y will maintain visual separation with us. We could not hear aircraft Y on frequency. Perhaps aircraft Y was on a different frequency. Because of controller OJT at norcal; we were not given a 'turn-on' vector; causing us to overshoot the runway 28L localizer; our visual approach clearance was delayed; and we were kept high (3000 ft MSL). This was the setup for the loss of separation and TCAS TA/RA. We started our descent for runway 28L and contacted tower. We received a TCAS TA then RA to climb; on final approximately 4 NM out on runway 28L localizer. We did not report TCAS TA to sfo tower due to workload. Norcal last reported the traffic at 4 O'clock position behind us. According to norcal safety assurance officer; separation was 500 ft; we were at 2200 ft MSL and the aircraft Y was at 1700 ft MSL. This incident raises many safety issues: 1) simultaneous visual approachs compromise safety when 1 aircraft does not have the other aircraft in sight. We couldn't see aircraft Y because we were held high by controller OJT. Aircraft Y was under our wing or underneath our fuselage. 2) controller OJT is necessary; but not when it compromises safety and creates a situation where an aircraft receives a TCAS TA/RA. We were forced to descend rapidly to make the approach. PAPI was wht/wht/wht/wht. 3) why didn't the sfo local controller issue a traffic alert regarding aircraft Y? 4) in class B airspace; the most controled airspace in the NAS; aircraft shouldn't receive TCAS TA/RA. For the future: if I don't have the other aircraft in sight; I won't accept a simultaneous visual approach. If at any time I receive a TCAS TA/RA; I will execute an evasive maneuver; contact ATC; and go missed. ATC can go to plan B. Increased arrival rates are important; but not when they compromise safety. The simultaneous visual approach procedures at sfo need to be carefully reviewed and revised.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL64 CLRED FOR TIPP TOE VISUAL RWY 28L AT SFO FAILED TO TURN AS PUBLISHED AND CONFLICTED WITH RWY 28R TFC; TCAS RA ACTIVATED.

Narrative: NORCAL CLRED US TIPP TOE VISUAL RWY 28L SFO. NORCAL CLRED ACFT Y VISUAL RWY 28R. WE NEVER ACQUIRED VISUAL CONTACT WITH ACFT Y. NORCAL STATED ACFT Y WILL MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION WITH US. WE COULD NOT HEAR ACFT Y ON FREQ. PERHAPS ACFT Y WAS ON A DIFFERENT FREQ. BECAUSE OF CTLR OJT AT NORCAL; WE WERE NOT GIVEN A 'TURN-ON' VECTOR; CAUSING US TO OVERSHOOT THE RWY 28L LOC; OUR VISUAL APCH CLRNC WAS DELAYED; AND WE WERE KEPT HIGH (3000 FT MSL). THIS WAS THE SETUP FOR THE LOSS OF SEPARATION AND TCAS TA/RA. WE STARTED OUR DSCNT FOR RWY 28L AND CONTACTED TWR. WE RECEIVED A TCAS TA THEN RA TO CLB; ON FINAL APPROX 4 NM OUT ON RWY 28L LOC. WE DID NOT RPT TCAS TA TO SFO TWR DUE TO WORKLOAD. NORCAL LAST RPTED THE TFC AT 4 O'CLOCK POS BEHIND US. ACCORDING TO NORCAL SAFETY ASSURANCE OFFICER; SEPARATION WAS 500 FT; WE WERE AT 2200 FT MSL AND THE ACFT Y WAS AT 1700 FT MSL. THIS INCIDENT RAISES MANY SAFETY ISSUES: 1) SIMULTANEOUS VISUAL APCHS COMPROMISE SAFETY WHEN 1 ACFT DOES NOT HAVE THE OTHER ACFT IN SIGHT. WE COULDN'T SEE ACFT Y BECAUSE WE WERE HELD HIGH BY CTLR OJT. ACFT Y WAS UNDER OUR WING OR UNDERNEATH OUR FUSELAGE. 2) CTLR OJT IS NECESSARY; BUT NOT WHEN IT COMPROMISES SAFETY AND CREATES A SITUATION WHERE AN ACFT RECEIVES A TCAS TA/RA. WE WERE FORCED TO DSND RAPIDLY TO MAKE THE APCH. PAPI WAS WHT/WHT/WHT/WHT. 3) WHY DIDN'T THE SFO LCL CTLR ISSUE A TFC ALERT REGARDING ACFT Y? 4) IN CLASS B AIRSPACE; THE MOST CTLED AIRSPACE IN THE NAS; ACFT SHOULDN'T RECEIVE TCAS TA/RA. FOR THE FUTURE: IF I DON'T HAVE THE OTHER ACFT IN SIGHT; I WON'T ACCEPT A SIMULTANEOUS VISUAL APCH. IF AT ANY TIME I RECEIVE A TCAS TA/RA; I WILL EXECUTE AN EVASIVE MANEUVER; CONTACT ATC; AND GO MISSED. ATC CAN GO TO PLAN B. INCREASED ARR RATES ARE IMPORTANT; BUT NOT WHEN THEY COMPROMISE SAFETY. THE SIMULTANEOUS VISUAL APCH PROCS AT SFO NEED TO BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND REVISED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.