37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 987168 |
Time | |
Date | 201201 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | SFO.Airport |
State Reference | CA |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | B757-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Climb |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | B777-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Climb |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
A B777 departed full length runway 28 right; rotating well before runway 01L/right. The local controller and I discussed whether or not to depart the B777; as we could not allow them to rotate before runway 28R. There was a tail wind component (120 at 5-7 KTS); so we agreed they would not be expected to rotate until passing runway 28R. A B757 rotated around runway 28L. I believe that pilots operate on the premise of what they are accustomed to (SID's; STAR's; next frequency; preferred runway; etc.) and seldom are given other than what they expect. This is how I work traffic. Whereas; we are seldom given the performance expected and now operate more on the 'work around whatever we might get' premise. This is dangerous. I am fearful that one day; unexpectedly; an aircraft will get rolled just after takeoff in the wake of the crossing departure and that person will never be able to live with what occurred. When an airplane crashes unexpectedly; there is some questioning about what could have been done to have kept it from occurring. In this scenario; we are desensitized by the frequent success of departing through the wake. I believe this would cause a career ending blow that the person might not ever be able to live with; and it would not be their fault entirely. Given that we have more knowledge today; I would like to see a video presentation developed that highlights some modern wake turbulence information for a scenario like this that provides memorable input as to what might occur.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SFO Controller described a intersecting runway operation involving a heavy jet; questioning the legitimacy of required and operationally applied separation.
Narrative: A B777 departed full length Runway 28 right; rotating well before Runway 01L/R. The Local Controller and I discussed whether or not to depart the B777; as we could not allow them to rotate before Runway 28R. There was a tail wind component (120 at 5-7 KTS); so we agreed they would not be expected to rotate until passing Runway 28R. A B757 rotated around Runway 28L. I believe that pilots operate on the premise of what they are accustomed to (SID's; STAR's; next frequency; preferred runway; etc.) and seldom are given other than what they expect. This is how I work traffic. Whereas; we are seldom given the performance expected and now operate more on the 'work around whatever we might get' premise. This is dangerous. I am fearful that one day; unexpectedly; an aircraft will get rolled just after takeoff in the wake of the crossing departure and that person will never be able to live with what occurred. When an airplane crashes unexpectedly; there is some questioning about what could have been done to have kept it from occurring. In this scenario; we are desensitized by the frequent success of departing through the wake. I believe this would cause a career ending blow that the person might not ever be able to live with; and it would not be their fault entirely. Given that we have more knowledge today; I would like to see a video presentation developed that highlights some modern wake turbulence information for a scenario like this that provides memorable input as to what might occur.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.