Air traffic controllers at sf airport

[deltex1]

Shouldn't they have been Warning the pilots concerning the approach? What were they watching??

 

[Oddball]

Little known fact...Control Tower personnel are responsible for handling all the traffic that is on the ground.

It's even a private pilot test question.

 

[Rozman]

I thought air traffic controllers were responsible for planes in the air and told
pilots what course,altitude and runway to make their approach on.
So I think at some point someone on the ground should have seen that the approach
was wrong and told them to go around and get in a better position to make their landing attempt.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Just stop, what a stupid thread. The blame for this falls on the pilot and possibly the airline responsible for maintaining the aircraft, it has absolutely nothing to do with control tower staff.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Maybe there was a gay pride parade going on somewhere in San Franfreako, and the control tower was seriously understaffed?

 

[OnePercenter]

Maybe there was a gay pride parade going on somewhere in San Franfreako, and the control tower was seriously understaffed?

Couldn't measure up at the bath house?

 

[OnePercenter]

Take a pilot with few hours flying a 747.

A runway under construction with the ILS turned off.

You get crash.

 

[williepete]

If the 777 was far enough out on final and broke the base altitude, the tower could have issued an altitude alert warning work load permitting. I got two of those in my 30 years. SFO stays very busy. I've been in and out of there a gazillion of times and the radios were always hot.

Here's some guidance (possibly out of date) I dug up from the way back machine:

2−1−6. SAFETY ALERT
Issue a safety alert to an aircraft if you are aware the
aircraft is in a position/altitude which, in your
judgment, places it in unsafe proximity to terrain,
obstructions, or other aircraft. Once the pilot informs
you action is being taken to resolve the situation, you
may discontinue the issuance of further alerts. Do not
assume that because someone else has responsibility
for the aircraft that the unsafe situation has been
observed and the safety alert issued; inform the
appropriate controller.

NOTE−
1. The issuance of a safety alert is a first priority (see
para2−1−2, Duty Priority) once the controller observes
and recognizes a situation of unsafe aircraft proximity to
terrain, obstacles, or other aircraft. Conditions, such as
workload, traffic volume, the quality/limitations of the
radar system, and the available lead time to react are
factors in determining whether it is reasonable for the
controller to observe and recognize such situations. While
a controller cannot see immediately the development of
every situation where a safety alert must be issued, the
controller must remain vigilant for such situations and
issue a safety alert when the situation is recognized.
2. Recognition of situations of unsafe proximity may result
from MSAW/E−MSAW/LAAS, automatic altitude readouts,
Conflict/Mode C Intruder Alert, observations on a PAR
scope, or pilot reports.
3. Once the alert is issued, it is solely the pilot’s
prerogative to determine what course of action, if any, will
be taken.

a. Terrain/Obstruction Alert. Immediately issue/
initiate an alert to an aircraft if you are aware the
aircraft is at an altitude which, in your judgment,
places it in unsafe proximity to terrain/obstructions.

Issue the alert as follows:
PHRASEOLOGY−
LOW ALTITUDE ALERT (call sign),
CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY.
THE (as appropriate) MEA/MVA/MOCA/MIA IN YOUR
AREA IS (altitude),
or if an aircraft is past the final approach fix
(nonprecision approach),
or the outer marker,
or the fix used in lieu of the outer marker (precision
approach),
and, if known, issue
THE (as appropriate) MDA/DH IS (altitude).

 

[Oddball]

I thought air traffic controllers were responsible for planes in the air and told
pilots what course,altitude and runway to make their approach on.
So I think at some point someone on the ground should have seen that the approach
was wrong and told them to go around and get in a better position to make their landing attempt.

Pilots make the go-around decision, not the tower.

 

[National Socialist]

Just stop, what a stupid thread. The blame for this falls on the pilot and possibly the airline responsible for maintaining the aircraft, it has absolutely nothing to do with control tower staff.

Exactly!

 

[Circe]

Just stop, what a stupid thread. The blame for this falls on the pilot and possibly the airline responsible for maintaining the aircraft, it has absolutely nothing to do with control tower staff.

Exactly!

According to the news, it was learn-while-you-earn ---- the pilot had never before landed a 777.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder if it was really all that cost-prohibitive to let him practice a few times before he did it for real.....

 

[mudwhistle]

It was because of sequester.

 

[whitehall]

Air traffic controllers don't "issue safety alerts" They call the pilots and tell them they are flying too low. The prevailing theory is that the plane was approaching too high and had to dive and decrease speed to hit the runway and they didn't get it right. The air traffic people probably didn't have time to react.

 

[Zona]

Maybe there was a gay pride parade going on somewhere in San Franfreako, and the control tower was seriously understaffed?

Hack

 

[williepete]

Air traffic controllers don't "issue safety alerts" They call the pilots and tell them they are flying too low.

Pray tell. I've been flying for 40 years. I retired after 30 years of professional flying. ATC is there for safety. If telling pilots they are flying too low isn't a safety alert, fine. Call it what you want. In ATC terminology, they issue an "altitude alert" which is what I posted and which I heard and experienced over the years. Don't believe me. Here's the FAA procedure:


Chapter 4.?Air Traffic Control

4-1-16. Safety Alert

A safety alert will be issued to pilots of aircraft being controlled by ATC if the controller is aware the aircraft is at an altitude which, in the controller's judgment, places the aircraft in unsafe proximity to terrain, obstructions or other aircraft. The provision of this service is contingent upon the capability of the controller to have an awareness of a situation involving unsafe proximity to terrain, obstructions and uncontrolled aircraft. The issuance of a safety alert cannot be mandated, but it can be expected on a reasonable, though intermittent basis. Once the alert is issued, it is solely the pilot's prerogative to determine what course of action, if any, to take. This procedure is intended for use in time critical situations where aircraft safety is in question. Noncritical situations should be handled via the normal traffic alert procedures.

 

[auditor0007]

Just stop, what a stupid thread. The blame for this falls on the pilot and possibly the airline responsible for maintaining the aircraft, it has absolutely nothing to do with control tower staff.

Exactly!

According to the news, it was learn-while-you-earn ---- the pilot had never before landed a 777.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder if it was really all that cost-prohibitive to let him practice a few times before he did it for real.....

He wasn't the only pilot. His co-pilot with more than adequate experience should have known there was a problem. While I have assumed pilot error from the beginning, I am still going to wait for them to finish their investigation before blaming the pilots, as in plural.

 

[whitehall]

Apparently some airport navigation equipment was down for repair but it didn't affect landings on a clear day. What were they going to do when the famous San Fran fog rolled in?

 

[asaratis]

Take a pilot with few hours flying a 747.

A runway under construction with the ILS turned off.

You get crash.

Air controllers issue a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) to advise them of situations such as closed runways, ILS non-functioning and thousands of other things affecting air safety. The ILS (Instrument Landing System) was known to be out for runway repairs. Pilots can still make VFR landings. (Visual Flight Rules) and there are other devices to aid them in landing such as PAPI (Precision Approach Path Indicator) lights...they are red when you're dead (too low), white when you're light (too high). There is nothing abnormal about VFR landings on runways with no ILS.

Just stop, what a stupid thread. The blame for this falls on the pilot and possibly the airline responsible for maintaining the aircraft, it has absolutely nothing to do with control tower staff.

Exactly!

According to the news, it was learn-while-you-earn ---- the pilot had never before landed a 777.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder if it was really all that cost-prohibitive to let him practice a few times before he did it for real.....

Don't start any lies here. The pilot had not landed a 777 at SFO before, but he has made several flights in them...just not enough to watch his airspeed close enough.

Apparently some airport navigation equipment was down for repair but it didn't affect landings on a clear day. What were they going to do when the famous San Fran fog rolled in?

They would close that runway. There are three more at SFO.

I think this is a textbook case of pilot error. Asiana is in deep shit.

 

[Circe]

[

According to the news, it was learn-while-you-earn ---- the pilot had never before landed a 777.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder if it was really all that cost-prohibitive to let him practice a few times before he did it for real.....

Don't start any lies here. The pilot had not landed a 777 at SFO before, but he has made several flights in them...just not enough to watch his airspeed close enough.

Nope, you are the liar:

The news has been clear all day: the pilot NEVER LANDED A 777 BEFORE IN HIS LIFE.

Try reading Google News before you post.

 

[asaratis]

[

According to the news, it was learn-while-you-earn ---- the pilot had never before landed a 777.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder if it was really all that cost-prohibitive to let him practice a few times before he did it for real.....

Don't start any lies here. The pilot had not landed a 777 at SFO before, but he has made several flights in them...just not enough to watch his airspeed close enough.

Nope, you are the liar:

The news has been clear all day: the pilot NEVER LANDED A 777 BEFORE IN HIS LIFE.

Try reading Google News before you post.

Do you have a link to back that up or are you just bluffing to save face?

I'll be back shortly with my link. Go get one of your own. We'll compare notes.