37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 979510 |
Time | |
Date | 201111 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | SFO.Tower |
State Reference | CA |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | B737-800 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Local |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Aircraft X checked in on 4 mile final runway 28L said they just picked up the airport inside the bridge; aircraft Y was staggered about 1/2 mile in trail for runway 28R. The weather was shaky at best; but changing rapidly; so every now and then visual separation could not be used. I called out to aircraft Y; but they were not there. I believe my coordinator called the final sector to get them. We could not see aircraft Y and assumed they could not see aircraft X and approach would be taking them out. They kept descending. This is a systemic issue when approach control works traffic in sfo tower's airspace on final attempting to get visual separation. Aircraft Y checked in high on a 2 1/2 mile final 1;500; aircraft X was a 2 mile final at 800. The first words out of aircraft Y were 'we are visual now with traffic in sight.' recommendation; when conditions are rapidly changing; and the aircraft are not able to see the traffic or airport as needed by the final approach fix; break them out.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SFO Tower Controller voiced concern regarding NCT's handling of a simultaneous arrivals to Runways 28L/R during rapidly changing weather conditions; suggesting NCT should have sent the second aircraft around earlier.
Narrative: Aircraft X checked in on 4 mile final Runway 28L said they just picked up the airport inside the bridge; Aircraft Y was staggered about 1/2 mile in trail for Runway 28R. The weather was shaky at best; but changing rapidly; so every now and then visual separation could not be used. I called out to Aircraft Y; but they were not there. I believe my coordinator called the final sector to get them. We could not see Aircraft Y and assumed they could not see Aircraft X and approach would be taking them out. They kept descending. This is a systemic issue when Approach Control works traffic in SFO Tower's airspace on final attempting to get visual separation. Aircraft Y checked in high on a 2 1/2 mile final 1;500; Aircraft X was a 2 mile final at 800. The first words out of Aircraft Y were 'we are visual now with traffic in sight.' Recommendation; when conditions are rapidly changing; and the aircraft are not able to see the traffic or airport as needed by the final approach fix; break them out.
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.