As The Tower Turns

luvflyin

luvflyin

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
May 8, 2015
Messages
15,927
Location
Santa Barbara, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Luvflyin
Tune in next week for the next edition of the continuing saga of SFO Tower….

 
Last edited:
Can’t take a sidestep at 1.8 miles out? :rolleyes:
 
Guess it’s gonna happen when you shuffle them so close. Shouldn’t have happened the second time.
 
NorCal approach did a good job trying to diffuse the situation...or at least passing the buck and agreeing with the pilot.

Another one from SFO...

 
Why tower keeps putting take off aircraft so close to landing traffic causing a go around twice is beyond comprehension.
 
frfly172 said:
Why tower keeps putting take off aircraft so close to landing traffic causing a go around twice is beyond comprehension.
Click to expand...

The north-south cross runways have been under construction for several months (I think that’s over now), so there’s been a lot of pressure to get departing planes off the east-west runways (28L and R), which are only spaced 740’ (on centerline). ATIS was actually saying be prepared to be given either runway for departure at the last second, which has led to delayed LUAWs and takeoff rolls.

Tower was clearly trying to stuff 100lbs into a ten pound sack, and deserved the what for they got. But it was a crap fest to begin with.
 
On the other hand the departing pilots would winge about why the tower made them wait for an aircraft on a 10 mile final. Clearly (to them) it would have worked. This controller tried to make it work and failed..twice. Sometimes you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
 
but the plane wasn't 10 miles out.
 
I must be missing something. Why weren't they using one of the parallel runways for arrivals and the other for departures?
 
Half Fast said:
I must be missing something. Why weren't they using one of the parallel runways for arrivals and the other for departures?
Click to expand...

SFO doesn’t have the capacity to do that. They’re often landing in close parallel (or just slightly staggered) and all but the heaviest departures usually use the cross runways, when they’re open. It’s one hell of an orchestration to watch. 2 landings followed by two crossing takeoffs, occasionally a heavy departure squeezes in, repeat every couple minutes, ad nauseam.
 
Didn't I hear a plane departing on the N-S runway in the middle of all that?
 
First one was borderline for a release. Should’ve just let 1390 land. Second time around he had plenty of room. Not even sure why he sent him around. I think the departure would’ve been off the end of the runway by the time 1390 crossed the threshold. Plenty of sep.
 
Velocity173 said:
First one was borderline for a release. Should’ve just let 1390 land. Second time around he had plenty of room. Not even sure why he sent him around. I think the departure would’ve been off the end of the runway by the time 1390 crossed the threshold. Plenty of sep.
Click to expand...
You know as well as I do that the audio on these type of videos doesn’t include stuff such as a departure controller calling the tower saying “hold for release” or “hold all departures” or something similar. Or pilots taking their time to exit the runway so the tower can get a departure out. Or pilots taking their time to start departure roll. I heard several hurry up or be ready transmissions but I couldn’t see what the controller saw. I’m not going to pick a side until I have all the facts. I’ll never have all the facts.

edit: I’m not saying that there aren’t crappy controllers out there. To quote the late George Carlin and modified for this conversation: Somewhere is the world’s worst controller, and someone will be cleared to do something stupid by them tomorrow.

The original quote in case someone is wondering: “Somewhere, someone is the world’s worst doctor. And someone has an appointment to see them tomorrow.”
 
Last edited:
Half Fast said:
Didn't I hear a plane departing on the N-S runway in the middle of all that?
Click to expand...

Nah, that was a plane exiting 28L or R after landing, either onto taxiway E or runway 1L. They were part of the problem - the heavy couldn’t get TO clearance until they were clear, so that was delayed a few seconds and the margin to get 1390 in behind the heavy departure was eaten up.
 
bflynn said:
What's approach speed, in the range of 140? That's about 45 seconds to sidestep 750 ft?
Click to expand...

Yep. Just like these guys did. I’d say they’re maybe 1.2-1.3 miles out and had plenty of time to line up. Pilot on 1390 was ticked off and just didn’t want to accommodate.

 
Velocity173 said:
Yep. Just like these guys did. I’d say they’re maybe 1.2-1.3 miles out and had plenty of time to line up. Pilot on 1390 was ticked off and just didn’t want to accommodate.

Click to expand...
With freight maybe, but I don't see a pilot pulling that crap with 100+ passengers in the back.
 
I don’t know what United’s SOP’s are, but if they are required to change the FMS performance numbers and approach for the runway change, he may have been justified declining the sidestep.
 
Timbeck2 said:
This controller tried to make it work and failed..twice. Sometimes you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Click to expand...


Well, you're at least damned if you fail. Twice.

I know little of the ATC world, and I'm just a low-time PP, but it seems like the controller should have given 1390 priority after the first go-around and made certain the plane was able to land on the second attempt. Trying to work two squeezes in a row resulted in two go-arounds in a row.
 
Salty said:
With freight maybe, but I don't see a pilot pulling that crap with 100+ passengers in the back.
Click to expand...

I don’t know, that “crap” doesn’t look very aggressive to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top