Narrative:

Approaching sfo the airport was reporting heavy rain and advertising ILS 19L. We were not anticipating delays due to radio reports that the airport was 'coming out of holding'; meaning no expected holding. The captain briefed the 19L approach and the approach descent check list accomplished. We were on the descent and on the Locke1 STAR. As we approached the groan intersection; approximately four to five minutes from groan; ATC issued the following clearance; 'cleared to the groan intersection; hold south on the 245 degree radial left hand turns ten mile legs and an efc'. This was different than the depicted holding pattern on the Locke1. The time available was compressed as we rapidly approached groan. There was some confusion on my part as to what radial ATC wanted because to hold south of groan with left hand turns on the 245 radial the FMC depicted the holding pattern on the north side of the fix. I asked ATC for clarification to confirm the radial they wanted us on. They reiterated the 245 radial. In hindsight; after reviewing the Locke1 star I noticed the groan intersection is depicted off of the mod 245 radial so maybe I misinterpreted ATC stating hold at groan intersection from the modesto 245 radial. I never heard reference to modesto. The result was that our holding pattern was built incorrectly on the north side and left hand turns. Interestingly; there was another aircraft preceding our flight that also misinterpreted the clearance and built their pattern on the north side as well. We had the occasion to meet with the other crew on the hotel van and the conversation about the confusing holding pattern came up. In our case; as well as theirs; we were given vectors shortly after it became apparent to ATC we entered the hold incorrectly. In both cases ATC gave no indication they were upset. In hindsight I wish I had asked ATC for vectors because of the ambiguity. On another matter; as we were being vectored from the holding pattern; we were given a heading and ultimately cleared to proceed to the archi intersection which was another point of confusion since it wasn't on the Locke1 or the 19L approach. Because of my familiarity with sfo I recalled the archi being on the FMS visual to 28R. We then inquired as to which runway was in use and late in the game were notified that sfo was landing 28R and 28L. Without the luxury of time; we hastily inserted the runway 28R and the ILS inserted in the navigation/rad page for reference to the ILS; briefed the approach and made announcements. The point I want to make is that it really put us in a bind; literally seven minutes from landing; to find out about the runway change. If we had the automated ATIS updating that was removed for cost savings we would have had a heads up about the very dynamic and changing weather events and resulting runway change.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An Air Carrier arrival into SFO received confused holding instructions issued by ATC followed by an unexpected routing and runway change. The absence of automated ATIS updating reportedly added to the confusion experienced.

Narrative: Approaching SFO the airport was reporting heavy rain and advertising ILS 19L. We were not anticipating delays due to radio reports that the airport was 'coming out of holding'; meaning no expected holding. The Captain briefed the 19L approach and the approach descent check list accomplished. We were on the descent and on the Locke1 STAR. As we approached the Groan Intersection; approximately four to five minutes from Groan; ATC issued the following clearance; 'Cleared to the Groan Intersection; hold south on the 245 degree radial left hand turns ten mile legs and an EFC'. This was different than the depicted holding pattern on the Locke1. The time available was compressed as we rapidly approached Groan. There was some confusion on my part as to what radial ATC wanted because to hold south of Groan with left hand turns on the 245 radial the FMC depicted the holding pattern on the north side of the fix. I asked ATC for clarification to confirm the radial they wanted us on. They reiterated the 245 radial. In hindsight; after reviewing the Locke1 star I noticed the Groan intersection is depicted off of the MOD 245 radial so maybe I misinterpreted ATC stating hold at Groan Intersection from the Modesto 245 radial. I never heard reference to Modesto. The result was that our holding pattern was built incorrectly on the north side and left hand turns. Interestingly; there was another aircraft preceding our flight that also misinterpreted the clearance and built their pattern on the north side as well. We had the occasion to meet with the other crew on the hotel van and the conversation about the confusing holding pattern came up. In our case; as well as theirs; we were given vectors shortly after it became apparent to ATC we entered the hold incorrectly. In both cases ATC gave no indication they were upset. In hindsight I wish I had asked ATC for vectors because of the ambiguity. On another matter; as we were being vectored from the holding pattern; we were given a heading and ultimately cleared to proceed to the Archi intersection which was another point of confusion since it wasn't on the Locke1 or the 19L approach. Because of my familiarity with SFO I recalled the Archi being on the FMS visual to 28R. We then inquired as to which runway was in use and late in the game were notified that SFO was landing 28R and 28L. Without the luxury of time; we hastily inserted the Runway 28R and the ILS inserted in the NAV/RAD page for reference to the ILS; briefed the approach and made announcements. The point I want to make is that it really put us in a bind; literally seven minutes from landing; to find out about the runway change. If we had the automated ATIS updating that was removed for cost savings we would have had a heads up about the very dynamic and changing weather events and resulting runway change.

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.