by ghgr on 12/19/23, 6:19 PM with 398 comments
by Hansenq on 12/19/23, 7:30 PM
Basically, SFO normally does VFR parallel approaches at night. Approach sequences these approaches miles beforehand, so there can be a chain of 10-20 aircraft all sequenced to land before responsibility is even transferred to SFO's tower. The incident happened during a particularly busy landing time at SFO, so there was indeed a massive chain of aircraft coming in to land.
Lufthansa was the only aircraft asking for ILS. Because ILS needs greater separation, that would require breaking the chain of approaches, sequencing a single ILS approach, then resuming. The chain of landings already sequenced takes priority, so Lufthansa would have to wait 30+ minutes for a gap to appear. By the time that gap appeared, Lufthansa had just decided to divert to Oakland. If Lufthansa had arrived a bit earlier or a bit later, they would have been sequenced just fine.
ATC could have been a bit more accommodating in rerouting their divert to SFO as soon as the a gap appeared, but Lufthansa was also the only airline requesting ILS, and they're already dealing with sequencing 20+ aircraft during a busy time. It's not clear who's in the wrong here; just an unintended consequence from many well-intentioned decisions.
by lsh123 on 12/19/23, 10:45 PM
2/ The approach sequence is established long long long before arrival to the airport. The ATC controllers (approach and center) coordinate arrivals and create sequencing hundreds of miles from a large airport like SFO. The last minute Lufthansa request for an instrument approach would have forced dozens of planes to go into hold or fly vectors which creates a lot of work for everyone.
3/ SFO tower is NOT responsible for approaches and was not dealing with holding Lufthansa. This is responsibility of NorCal approach
4/ My personal take is that Lufthansa should have advised ATC that they need instrument approach much earlier (as soon as they got ATIS which would be 50-100 miles from airport). That would have enabled ATC to create a gap for them. Last minute request is a surprise nobody needs. The Lufthansa attitude afterwards is unacceptable. They were asking for preferential treatment (get us in and screw a couple dozen of other airplanes). They also should have communicated to ATC that they have 30 mins of fuel for hold and that would informed NorCal about time limits they are working with. Lastly, threatening ATC with a fuel emergency.... not nice, not nice at all. From my personal experience with ATC is that they are very accommodating but they don't like surprises. Tell them what you want early and controllers usually find ways to make it work by the time you get there. Have a last minute request? If ATC is not busy they will help you. If ATC is busy -- go to the back of the line. Which is exactly what happened here.
by YeBanKo on 12/19/23, 7:32 PM
> The NTSB determined the probable cause was the Air Canada flight crew's confusion of the runway with the parallel taxiway, with contributing causes including the crew's failure to use the instrument landing system (ILS), as well as pilot fatigue.
FAA changed the rules for SFO and made visual approaches forbidden at night "when an adjacent parallel runway is closed" [2]. Maybe Lufthansa plays it safe and requires ILS for all long haul night landings.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759
[2] https://www.flightglobal.com/faa-changes-san-francisco-landi...
by reso on 12/19/23, 8:15 PM
> Controller: What is your divert field?
> Pilot: Oakland
> Controller: Ok you need vectors to Oakland?
> Pilot: No, my company forbids visual separation at night, what is the problem here?
> Controller: I can't have this conversation with you. You either divert to Oakland or you can continue to hold. It's up to you sir.
> Pilot: Ok you promised me 10 minutes, that ran out 4 minutes ago, so how many more minutes?
> Controller: This conversation is over.
So this controller, knowing the plane was near a fuel emergency, gave the pilots the option to either crash their plane with 240 people on board, or to divert to Oakland. This is tough for me to wrap my head around.
I don't want to blame this one controller for what is obviously a pattern of systematic failures at SFO, but I'm going to seriously consider flying into Oakland or San Jose next time if this is the attitude of the controllers there.
by ho_schi on 12/19/23, 11:30 PM
It does not apply to their home base, which is Frankfurt and Munich. The pilots are familiar with these airports, traffic patterns and so on.
Lufthansa tries to schedule outbound flights so that they arrive at daytime - if possible.
I don’t know why the controller was handling the situation that way. Taking flight duration and delay into account that was uncomfortable for the crew and passengers. And a waste of fuel. Mind the necessary repositioning of the plane, they had to move it to SFO later anyway.
I think it is tough when people discuss your work in public. And I’m not involved and lack knowledge! I hope the involved people learn and improve. We are all humans and make mistakes and/or misbehave. I have a lot to improve.
by karcass on 12/19/23, 7:38 PM
by perihelions on 12/19/23, 9:39 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_052 (1990)
https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/the-words-not-spoken-the...
There was a similar fact pattern to the OP: the pilots relied on time estimates from ATC which turned out to be inaccurate,
- "Due to the air traffic controllers giving ultimately untrue delay estimations the flight became critically low on fuel."
by daedalus_f on 12/19/23, 7:29 PM
We don't know what the approach into SFO looked like that night, but you can bet it was busy. VASAviation videos are often highly misleading in this regard. Most of the talk on the ATC frequency is cut (sometimes explicitly, sometimes not) leaving just that relevant to the videos content, the time is compressed and they only plot a few of the planes involved, making the airspace look clear.
My understanding is that SFO often has two closely spaced parallel runways taking arrivals. The visual approach is preferred because then the pilots on parallel approaches keep visual separation from each other, allowing more frequent landings. An ILS approach requires more space between planes (because ATC remains responsible for separation). Hence, the Lufthansa had to wait for a gap big enough to fit that ILS approach in, or the whole stack of planes lined up for the approach would have to be juggled - how feasible that would be I don't know.
by StopHammoTime on 12/19/23, 10:15 PM
A fuel emergency would never be severe enough that they would be forced to land at SFO in this situation. In fact, if they were truly forced to land the pilots would lose their jobs because they left it way too late. Oakland was always a reasonable option.
Finally, fuel emergencies are not actually a standard call. It is a thing that is adhered to in the industry as courtesy. Unless there is a malfunction with the fuel system (which would be a mayday call) then it is mostly avoidable.
by YeBanKo on 12/19/23, 7:20 PM
by csours on 12/20/23, 4:05 AM
Lufthansa Requirement: Instrument landing
SFO Preference: Visual landing
Reason for Lufthansa requirement: IFR/ILS is safer than visual
Reason for SFO preference: Visual allows more planes with lower separation, leading to better throughput.
More context: Lufthansa would be using their instruments anyway, without declaring instrument flight rules landing. Declaring ILS in some generic sense is "safer", but specifically it means that the controllers cannot clear them to land in a degraded ILS environment, where perhaps some beacons are offline.
The SFO preference is not just something that the airport or the controller decided - it's also good for the airlines and the flying public. More planes land faster. The planes took off with the expectation that they would be able to land at a certain rate; otherwise they wouldn't schedule them to arrive so frequently.
The problem with "Everybody Knows" is that you really don't. The controller may assume that Lufthansa means "hey are all the beacons on?" when they say "IFR landing". Lufthansa may assume that IFR clearance means that the ILS equipment is operational, but that they can still fit into the VFR sequence.
In this case, those assumptions probably would have worked out Ok. But if "Everybody Knows" is part of your work culture and you work on life critical systems, than someone will eventually die, as you can see from the history of investigations into air transport incidents.
If you feel like someone is saying or implying "Everybody Knows" in a safety critical or life critical system, that is bad culture. Start documenting.
by aaronbrethorst on 12/19/23, 7:00 PM
by Animats on 12/19/23, 7:44 PM
by YeBanKo on 12/19/23, 7:50 PM
Lufthansa asked for ILS, was put on hold for 20 min, then ATC promised another 10 minutes, and then 14 more min passed and this is when the pilot got frustrated.
by philip1209 on 12/19/23, 7:35 PM
Anybody have any sources on this?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214
by ideator on 12/19/23, 10:30 PM
Recently there was a separation issue with a very similar night time visual approach into SFO.
It's not like trying to squeeze two flights into close parallel runways at the same time to maximizer capacity is a very safe thing to do considering everything that could go wrong
by mattpallissard on 12/20/23, 2:55 AM
Flight got cancelled and I got rebooked for 4 days later. Which was after my business trip so I cancelled. I'm still waiting on my refund 3 months later. Everyone I speak to is nice, polite, agrees to refund me while saying but we'll have to call you back "because policy", pretty annoying. Whatever, i'll get it eventually I'm sure
I don't particularly care for Lufthansa.
by jMyles on 12/19/23, 7:25 PM
What's the point of equipping SFO with ILS if it's just going to sit idle?
by jersa on 12/20/23, 3:58 AM
But I'm not just here reppin' for Oakland – apparently, there's a lot of dysfunction at the FAA that I had no idea about. Glad I clicked.
*(well, maybe not a 12+ hr one)
by jtagen on 12/19/23, 6:47 PM
Not sure: 1) How long this would take 2) If this actually endangers anyone/anything
by binary132 on 12/20/23, 1:34 AM
by pdx_flyer on 12/19/23, 10:26 PM
For reference the flight is usually a 6:45p arrival but was very late on the evening in question.
by talkingtab on 12/19/23, 10:37 PM
Having watched the planes land at SFO at night provides an additional context. There are often two long streams of planes, like a spaced necklace, coming in to land. They look far apart when flying but then you notice just have fast another one comes.
And to those who fault the traffic controller - it is on the controller if something bad happens. Politeness, even a charge of grumpiness goes out the window in the face of that responsibility. Period. IMHO.
by riversflow on 12/19/23, 7:03 PM
Why should ATC at a busy airport be so accommodating? Lufthasa is the one making this hard on everyone.
I used to watch both these airports fairly frequently from Oyster bay regional park, they are both super busy with flights often lining up to the horizon.
by pdonis on 12/20/23, 2:59 AM
by isatty on 12/20/23, 1:24 AM
You don’t get to cry wolf and cut the line because you were late and want preferential treatment. Go to Oakland as told, wait, or declare an actual emergency for emergency procedures to be run for you.
by phendrenad2 on 12/20/23, 5:46 AM
by blindriver on 12/20/23, 12:21 AM
by account4mypc on 12/20/23, 12:44 AM
by lotusride on 12/21/23, 6:00 PM
by 6stringmerc on 12/20/23, 12:14 AM
Frankly I don’t care since Delta dumped my Dad’s pension on me and my generation fuck that industry.
by kokken on 12/19/23, 6:55 PM
Even from this article that clearly seems to think Lufthansa is in the wrong I walked away with a feeling that ATC and small town cops are one and the same.
by lowbloodsugar on 12/19/23, 7:11 PM
by astrange on 12/20/23, 2:46 AM
Like "You are pre-ordering of the pretzel to eat on board of the aircraft? Then klick here!".
I get the impression Germans think they're great at English and so don't actually check to see if they are or not.
by babyshake on 12/19/23, 7:43 PM