37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 995740 |
Time | |
Date | 201202 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | SFO.Airport |
State Reference | CA |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Route In Use | Vectors |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
Events | |
Anomaly | Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude |
Narrative:
While communicating with norcal approach; I was the pilot monitoring while we were cleared for the tip toe visual approach into sfo; runway 28L. Once on the heading portion of the published approach; ATC called out traffic on a right downwind which was about to turn right base. After questioning again the position of the aircraft; I called the traffic in sight. I cannot remember whether he said that traffic was for the right or left side; but he said to maintain visual separation with the traffic; follow the traffic; and maintain 210 KTS. I questioned ATC about the speed; since it looked like we were converging quite rapidly; and the communication was blocked. We were coincidentally assigned 180 KTS to the san mateo bridge by ATC and told to switch to tower. The first officer and I were in constant discussion about the close proximity of the aircraft we were following on the right base leg. I felt we were getting entirely too close; and we had not even intercepted the localizer for 28L yet. We then were unsure which runway this aircraft was landing that we were following; and as we were debating a turn off of course to the left to go around; we received a TCAS RA 'descend' command which we complied with for a short time. Once satisfied that we were no in a collision danger; I instructed the first officer to go around; and climb while turning left away from the traffic. I told tower of our situation and asked for missed approach instructions; which we complied with. Cause; I believe the aircraft on right base overshot final due to a 30 KTS crosswind from the northwest; blowing him into our center line. We were however confused about which runway he was landing; and had inadequate time to query ATC as the event occurred quickly. ATC in sfo issued 'follow' instructions for aircraft landing the parallel runway; which is extremely confusing; and non-standard. Usually; 'follow' instructions are issued when following an aircraft to the same runway and not the parallel. This even was further complicated by the time of day; which was night time. Suggestions; I believe the other aircraft most likely overshot final; and that we should have been assigned a slower speed so that we were not both turning into each other while turning onto the localizer. Since we never even intercepted the localizer; I see no fault on our part.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air Carrier inbound to SFO via the Tip Toe to Runway 28L executed a go around when traffic for the parallel runway apparently over flew the final. The reporter expressed concern regarding the ATC term 'follow' which was less than clear.
Narrative: While communicating with Norcal Approach; I was the Pilot Monitoring while we were cleared for the Tip Toe Visual approach into SFO; Runway 28L. Once on the heading portion of the published approach; ATC called out traffic on a right downwind which was about to turn right base. After questioning again the position of the aircraft; I called the traffic in sight. I cannot remember whether he said that traffic was for the right or left side; but he said to maintain visual separation with the traffic; follow the traffic; and maintain 210 KTS. I questioned ATC about the speed; since it looked like we were converging quite rapidly; and the communication was blocked. We were coincidentally assigned 180 KTS to the San Mateo bridge by ATC and told to switch to Tower. The First Officer and I were in constant discussion about the close proximity of the aircraft we were following on the right base leg. I felt we were getting entirely too close; and we had not even intercepted the localizer for 28L yet. We then were unsure which runway this aircraft was landing that we were following; and as we were debating a turn off of course to the left to go around; we received a TCAS RA 'descend' command which we complied with for a short time. Once satisfied that we were no in a collision danger; I instructed the First Officer to go around; and climb while turning left away from the traffic. I told Tower of our situation and asked for missed approach instructions; which we complied with. Cause; I believe the aircraft on right base overshot final due to a 30 KTS crosswind from the northwest; blowing him into our center line. We were however confused about which runway he was landing; and had inadequate time to query ATC as the event occurred quickly. ATC in SFO issued 'follow' instructions for aircraft landing the parallel runway; which is extremely confusing; and non-standard. Usually; 'follow' instructions are issued when following an aircraft to the same runway and not the parallel. This even was further complicated by the time of day; which was night time. Suggestions; I believe the other aircraft most likely overshot final; and that we should have been assigned a slower speed so that we were not both turning into each other while turning onto the localizer. Since we never even intercepted the localizer; I see no fault on our part.
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.