Narrative:

Flying the modesto 3 arrival into sfo at fl 400; we requested descent 3 times to ensure that we would be able to make the 'expect cedes at 11;000 ft crossing restriction. We were given clearances to descend to FL370; then FL340; FL240 and then finally a descent to cross cedes at 11;000. While in the descent we were told to slow to 280 knots. We advised ATC that we might not make the crossing restriction now and were told to do our best. We were handed over to norcal approach and given direct archi; descend to 9;000 and then a speed reduction to 210 KTS. We were cleared to intercept the FMS bridge visual 28R laterally but were not cleared to descend. ATC was pointing out traffic coming up from behind around sjc and lower than us inbound to runway 28L. As I was the pilot flying; I was reluctant to acknowledge I saw the traffic; for fear that I would not be able to maintain a visual when I turned west and away from the traffic at archi. As a result of this; we crossed archi at 9000; 2000 above the crossing restriction height of 7000 or above and only 24.0 DME from sfo. On a straight 3 to 1 glide path; we were already high. The traffic; an MD80; called us in sight and was told to maintain visual separation. Upon hearing that the MD80 was to maintain visual; we called that we had the aircraft in sight. ATC then cleared us to descend and also told us to maintain a visual with the MD80. Again; since he was coming up from behind us; this was challenging. As we were descending through approximately 8000; we were given clearance to slow to 180 knots. We asked for clarification since he was behind us and were told not to pass the MD80; which for some reason they wanted to sequence in front of us. To attempt to comply with this clearance we had to extend the gear with the flaps at 25 at 8000. We crossed every fix at least 1000 high on the approach but had a chance to cross samul at 1800 until we were given another speed reduction to 160 knots; which made it virtually impossible. (Flap 30 limit is 152) we were struggling to get down and stay behind the md 80. We caught the glideslope and were stable at 500. The weather was VFR. Keeping you high and slowing you to follow an airplane has always been the practice at norcal. Routinely; you are kept from initial descent at cruise to cedes due to VFR traffic beneath. Then; ATC will usually have you cross archi at 8000 instead of the published 7000. We are accustomed to these peculiarities; however; ATC was stretching the limits this day. The 757 is difficult enough to get to descend but the winglet 757's are even harder. I suspect the personnel that develop these arrival procedures do so in the context of a stable normal approach. Being high at every fix almost every time we arrive in sfo puts us in a box every time we fly in there. It shouldn't be necessary to be this aggressive in flying these visuals. If ATC clears us for the visual approach; they ought to clear us for the entire visual approach with the recommended altitudes and allow us to fly it as such without their local modifications for what appears to be uncertain reasons. They also typically refuse to clear us for the approach when we only acknowledge the airport in sight instead forcing us to acknowledge an airplane adjacent that we know we will lose visual contact with once we line up on the approach and localizer since he is behind us. Norcal ATC needs to understand basic aerodynamics and aircraft capabilities ie.; that you can't both slow down and go down as they attempt to force us to do and then be at the extreme limits of a stable approach for landing. As a result of their handling I find myself compelled to add fuel even on VFR days due to their peculiar handling of aircraft arriving in sfo.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain described in detail; a visual approach event; to SFO; listing a number of ATC factors that make approach compliance difficult; including ATC altitude assignment practices; ATC's lack of knowledge regarding aircraft performance characteristics and visual separation clearances that are very difficult to execute.

Narrative: Flying the Modesto 3 Arrival into SFO at FL 400; we requested descent 3 times to ensure that we would be able to make the 'expect CEDES at 11;000 FT crossing restriction. We were given clearances to descend to FL370; then FL340; FL240 and then finally a descent to cross CEDES at 11;000. While in the descent we were told to slow to 280 knots. We advised ATC that we might not make the crossing restriction now and were told to do our best. We were handed over to NorCal Approach and given direct ARCHI; descend to 9;000 and then a speed reduction to 210 KTS. We were cleared to intercept the FMS Bridge Visual 28R laterally but were not cleared to descend. ATC was pointing out traffic coming up from BEHIND around SJC and LOWER than us inbound to Runway 28L. As I was the pilot flying; I was reluctant to acknowledge I saw the traffic; for fear that I would not be able to maintain a visual when I turned west and away from the traffic at ARCHI. As a result of this; we crossed ARCHI at 9000; 2000 above the crossing restriction height of 7000 or above and only 24.0 DME from SFO. On a straight 3 to 1 glide path; we were already high. The traffic; an MD80; called us in sight and was told to maintain visual separation. Upon hearing that the MD80 was to maintain visual; we called that we had the aircraft in sight. ATC then cleared us to descend and also told us to maintain a visual with the MD80. Again; since he was coming up from behind us; this was challenging. As we were descending through approximately 8000; we were given clearance to slow to 180 knots. We asked for clarification since he was behind us and were told not to pass the MD80; which for some reason they wanted to sequence in front of us. To attempt to comply with this clearance we had to extend the gear with the flaps at 25 at 8000. We crossed every fix at least 1000 high on the approach but had a chance to cross SAMUL at 1800 until we were given another speed reduction to 160 knots; which made it virtually impossible. (Flap 30 limit is 152) We were struggling to get down and stay behind the MD 80. We caught the glideslope and were stable at 500. The weather was VFR. Keeping you high and slowing you to follow an airplane has always been the practice at NorCal. Routinely; you are kept from initial descent at cruise to Cedes due to VFR traffic beneath. Then; ATC will usually have you cross ARCHI at 8000 instead of the published 7000. We are accustomed to these peculiarities; however; ATC was stretching the limits this day. The 757 is difficult enough to get to descend but the winglet 757's are even harder. I suspect the personnel that develop these arrival procedures do so in the context of a stable normal approach. Being high at every fix almost every time we arrive in SFO puts us in a box every time we fly in there. It shouldn't be necessary to be this aggressive in flying these visuals. If ATC clears us for the visual approach; they ought to clear us for the entire visual approach with the recommended altitudes and allow us to fly it as such without their local modifications for what appears to be uncertain reasons. They also typically refuse to clear us for the approach when we only acknowledge the airport in sight instead forcing us to acknowledge an airplane adjacent that we know we will lose visual contact with once we line up on the approach and localizer since he is behind us. NorCal ATC needs to understand basic aerodynamics and aircraft capabilities ie.; that you can't both slow down and go down as they attempt to force us to do and then be at the extreme limits of a stable approach for landing. As a result of their handling I find myself compelled to add fuel even on VFR days due to their peculiar handling of aircraft arriving in SFO.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.