Avertir le modérateur

12/07/2013

Landing at KSFO…

http://akama.arc.nasa.gov/ASRSDBOnline/QueryWizard_Display.aspx?server=ASRSO

 

Extraits:

 

008.jpgI flew a mostly uneventful leg to SFO, the Big Sur Arrival to the Bridge Visual for Runway 28L. We set up and briefed for LNAV/VNAV approach in visual conditions. As we joined the final approach course ATC slowed us to 180 KTS and advised us of traffic for the parallel runway, a B767-300. The First Officer and I had the traffic in sight and told ATC. ATC advised us to maintain visual separation with the B767 and continue our approach for Runway 28L. As the B767 got closer it was apparent that we were getting uncomfortably close. We slowed further to 160 KTS to keep some distance between the B767 and ourselves. It was quite obvious that the B767 was becoming a threat. As the B767 flew through his and continued through our own approach course we were glad for the additional spacing that we had created. With the B767 well south of his and our runway approach and was probably a half mile or so to the left of our course and a mile or two ahead of us. (He really overshot his turn) ATC pointed out this obvious event and rather than have him cross in front of us again asked us to change runways and make Runway 28R our new landing runway. I disengaged the autopilot as ATC was issuing this new clearance and as anticipated we encountered the B767's wake turbulence. After getting through the wake turbulence I commanded the First Officer to deselect the flight directors and tune up Runway 28R localizer all the while keeping a very suspicious eye on the B767 as he accepted his NEW runway as well. Once again the B767 seemed to slightly over shoot his course and we deviated a little bit away from him to maintain safe spacing. Approaching 1,000 FT the First Officer confirmed with ATC that the B767 was really landing on 28L and that we were to land on 28R. ATC thanked us for our help and told us to continue to our landing runway, 28R. After landing (side by side with the B767) we turned off our runway and held short of Runway 28L). We thanked each other for the successful event.

 

The First Officer landed on Runway 28R at SFO. We proceeded to Taxiway T turnoff where we exchanged control of the aircraft. As the exchange was happening, we were instructed by SFOTower "cross Runway 28L expedite crossing aircraft on final." My First Officer acknowledged the crossing and I aligned my aircraft with Tango, added power to hurry across, I did my last check of 28L before crossing when I saw an Airbus going rapidly down the runway. I immediately brought my aircraft to a stop past the hold short line but before the runway edge lights. The Airbus on 28L stopped his aircraft short of Delta and called the Tower. SFO Tower sent the aircraft around, the Airbus on 28L cleared the runway at Delta and when the way was clear I taxied across 28L and on to my gate. I remembered later a partial clearance to another aircraft to expedite which I believe was the other Airbus on 28L. I am certain that if I had not stopped my aircraft we would have at least collided wingtips. There is not enough room to have an aircraft clear 28L at Delta and simultaneously cross an aircraft of Taxiway Tango.

 

We [were] flying the LDA PRM 28R in SFO. We were put 2.5 miles behind a 747-400 who was on the ILS 28L. The winds below 4,000 FT were 180 at 15 KTS and surface winds were 250 at 10 KTS. I asked to slow due to the 747's close proximity on the approach given the southerly winds that would blow the 747's wake into our path. The Controller seemed upset that we were concerned about the possible wake encounter and said that we could go missed if we had a problem. We broke out at 1,700 FT and stayed high and flew over the wake that we could clearly see due to the moisture in the air! My issue is with the Controller not having any situational awareness in regards to the 747 and the winds aloft considering the close proximity of the aircraft and these dangerous approaches. Smaller aircraft should be still given 5 miles behind a heavy on this approach considering how close the 2 runways are (750 FT)! This is an accident waiting to happen!


Tip Toe Visual to 28L. Had traffic, A319, called in the descent for 28R. Traffic went below cloud deck so he was not in sight. Controller stepped us down until below the cloud deck. Had traffic in sight. As we came down to capture the glide path from above we caught up with the A319. We were LOC capture on 28L. We were dead abeam with the A319 and he was CLOSE! I do not know if he overshot 28R center line or not. I decided too close for me and as I went for the TOGA, the TCAS RA "Climb Climb Climb." We executed a normal go around. Went around for left downwind and made a normal approach and landing on 28R. The passengers on the right side of the aircraft were grateful, as they saw the whole thing quite clearly. Suggestions, SFO operates on the edge of safety with simultaneous double parallel and intersecting runways operations (28L/R for landing and 1R/L for take-off) I am quite surprised that it is authorized to operate TCAS in the TA only mode (note on 10-7 page). Having had friends killed after silencing a safety system, I would never operate in TA only mode. In the future, I will be sure to have longitudinal separation of any parallel traffic. A kudos to the training department on the debrief with the FO, I asked him if I did the go around correctly. He said it was textbook. It all happened so fast, we just did it and I didn't remember. Relaxed and controlled.

 

I was the Captain and Pilot Flying on a B757 landing SFO Runway 28L in night VMC conditions. B767 landed Runway 28R approximately 1/4 mile behind us. My concern is that arriving aircraft on simultaneous visual approaches to Runways 28L/R at SFO are closely spaced wing tip to wing tip, but on different Approach Control frequencies. It is frequently ambiguous whether or not the other aircraft also has you in visual contact. Typically, you try not to pass the other airplane in order to maintain visual contact to touchdown. In this case, both aircraft got into a race to fall back behind the other, slowing to target approach airspeed early in the approach. The result this time was that the B767 for 28R won, leaving us to query ATC if the B767 had us in sight. My First Officer F/O queried NorCal Approach if they had us in sight, but he could not get an answer. On very short final, the F/O looked back, but reported that he could no longer see that aircraft.

 

Departing SFO we required either Runway 28L or R for departure. We were cleared by ground to taxi to and hold short of 28L. Tower subsequently cleared us to cross 28L and taxi into position and hold on 28R. As I taxied between the runways I looked out on final and it appeared that a plane was approaching 28R for landing, approximately 1/2 mile out. My copilot was briefly heads-down changing the runway and takeoff data in the FMC. I asked him to look out, and he agreed that it did appear a plane was approaching the runway we were cleared for. I asked him to tell Tower we were holding short, and Tower immediately insisted we were cleared into position and hold. My copilot replied that there was a plane landing right in front of us. The Tower Controller seemed confused, and as the plane passed by, he said OK, we were now cleared into position and hold. The landing airplane was told to go around, from less than 30 FT above the runway. We taxied on to the runway and were subsequently cleared for takeoff. The rest of the departure was normal. I am certain that if I had not visually cleared final and stopped before taking the runway it would have at the least been a very near miss. If I had continued as cleared and the arriving plane had not seen us or been able to react in time, we would have collided.

 

A B747 was on final for Runway 28L; an A319 was on final for Runway 28R. The B747 was about one mile behind the A319 and showing 40 KTS overtake on speed. The Local Controller told the B747 not to pass the A319 for the parallel runway or they would have to be sent around. The B747 complained that NCT had given them 180 KTS to 4DME. The B747 was about 8 DME when he was given the instructions not to pass the A319. The Local Controller pointed the situation out to the Supervisor and asked the Supervisor if he (the Local Controller) should take corrective action and send one of the aircraft around. The Supervisor watched what was happening and when the B747 was abeam the A319 and still showing 20 KTS faster, the Supervisor said, "Let them land. It will be alright." Shortly after that the B747 went around on his own because he was about to pass the A319. I recommend retraining for the Local Controller and Supervisor on wake turbulence rules and taking corrective action to prevent this happening in the future.

 

Received TCAS RA on approximately 5.0 mile final Runway 28R KSFO. We had been cleared via the FMSBridge Visual 28R and a Carrier X B777 was simultaneously on approach to 28L. Both flights had reported to NORCAL Approach that we had each other in sight. We were told to hold 180 knots to a 5 mile final and that the B777 would stay behind us inbound. As we lined up on final for 28R we had very little spacing on the B777 aircraft and I questioned the SFO tower controller if we were allowed to land wingtip to wingtip. The tower controller responded that it was okay so we continued the approach. Shortly afterwards we received a "Climb" RA and almost simultaneously a different tower controller issued go-around instructions to the B777. I told the First Officer (PF) to continue the approach and we received a "Clear of Traffic" alert. The remainder of the approach and landing was uneventful and nothing further was said.

 

15:30 Écrit par HMC | Commentaires (0)

Les commentaires sont fermés.

 
Toute l'info avec 20minutes.fr, l'actualité en temps réel Toute l'info avec 20minutes.fr : l'actualité en temps réel | tout le sport : analyses, résultats et matchs en direct
high-tech | arts & stars : toute l'actu people | l'actu en images | La une des lecteurs : votre blog fait l'actu