Narrative:

I was working the san francisco finals. We do parallel visual approaches to runway 28L and runway 28R because it doubles the arrival capacity. A B767 was vectored into position for a visual approach runway 28L. I called traffic several times on the parallel traffic to runway 28R. He did not see it. I then put him on a 290 heading and assigned 4;000. With that vector I was ensuring 3 miles of separation from the traffic while the traffic descended out of 4;000 to 3;000. After a couple more traffic calls; the B767 saw the traffic. I instruct him to maintain visual separation. The B767 did not read back the instruction to maintain visual separation; instead he says; 'do you still want us to maintain 4;000 and heading 290?' I said; 'B767 I want you to acknowledge the instruction to maintain visual separation and to use your call sign in the transmission'. The B767 responds; 'ok we'll play air traffic controller for you.......' (I didn't hear the rest of what he said). At this point I didn't know what to do. I could not accept his statement as visual separation. I said; 'B767 I can't accept that response; or something to that effect. I then talk to other aircraft; a company heavy jet behind them for runway 28L. Some of my frustration carried over to that flight unnecessarily. I went back to the B767 and got them to correctly acknowledge the instruction to maintain visual separation. I then cleared the B767 for a visual approach to runway 28L. Shortly thereafter I noticed the B767 was a little over 4 miles behind a B757. I called that traffic; the B767 didn't see it; and so I sent him around to ensure separation. This is a common situation for this airline. They often will not acknowledge transmissions to maintain visual separation. They also will fail to use their call sign in read backs. Both of these situations have resulted in operational errors being charged to the controller because the controller failed to ensure visual separation was applied. Recommendation; if a pilot has no intention of maintaining visual separation he should tell the first nct controller that he talks to 'request no side-by'. The controller then puts 'nsb' in the secondary scratch pad to alert the final controller. The aircraft that is requesting no side-by then gets delayed by the feeders until there is an opening on the final without side-by traffic. Sometimes that delay can last 30 minutes or more but this is not punitive. It just makes sense to not delay the other aircraft that are willing to maintain visual separation and are thereby increasing the arrival capacity. It would also help if the airline's pilots changed their culture to realize that ATC is a resource that is doing a valuable job.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NCT Controller described an ATC initiated go around event when traffic conducting side-by visual approaches to Runways 28L/R were reluctant to acknowledge visual separation directions.

Narrative: I was working the San Francisco Finals. We do parallel visual approaches to Runway 28L and Runway 28R because it doubles the arrival capacity. A B767 was vectored into position for a Visual Approach Runway 28L. I called traffic several times on the parallel traffic to Runway 28R. He did not see it. I then put him on a 290 heading and assigned 4;000. With that vector I was ensuring 3 miles of separation from the traffic while the traffic descended out of 4;000 to 3;000. After a couple more traffic calls; the B767 saw the traffic. I instruct him to maintain visual separation. The B767 did not read back the instruction to maintain visual separation; instead he says; 'Do you still want us to maintain 4;000 and heading 290?' I said; 'B767 I want you to acknowledge the instruction to maintain visual separation and to use your call sign in the transmission'. The B767 responds; 'OK we'll play Air Traffic Controller for you.......' (I didn't hear the rest of what he said). At this point I didn't know what to do. I could not accept his statement as visual separation. I said; 'B767 I can't accept that response; or something to that effect. I then talk to other aircraft; a company heavy jet behind them for Runway 28L. Some of my frustration carried over to that flight unnecessarily. I went back to the B767 and got them to correctly acknowledge the instruction to maintain visual separation. I then cleared the B767 for a visual approach to Runway 28L. Shortly thereafter I noticed the B767 was a little over 4 miles behind a B757. I called that traffic; the B767 didn't see it; and so I sent him around to ensure separation. This is a common situation for this airline. They often will not acknowledge transmissions to maintain visual separation. They also will fail to use their call sign in read backs. Both of these situations have resulted in operational errors being charged to the Controller because the Controller failed to ensure visual separation was applied. Recommendation; if a pilot has no intention of maintaining visual separation he should tell the first NCT Controller that he talks to 'request no side-by'. The Controller then puts 'NSB' in the secondary scratch pad to alert the Final Controller. The aircraft that is requesting no side-by then gets delayed by the Feeders until there is an opening on the final without side-by traffic. Sometimes that delay can last 30 minutes or more but this is not punitive. It just makes sense to not delay the other aircraft that are willing to maintain visual separation and are thereby increasing the arrival capacity. It would also help if the airline's pilots changed their culture to realize that ATC is a resource that is doing a valuable job.

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.