@VASAviation Thanks for putting these videos online for public viewing. I have learned so much about aviation just from watching them! I used to be a "nervous flyer" especially during the first 5 minutes of the flight... we're talking sedatives and crushing my poor husband's hand at the slightest bump. But now, after watching a TON of these, and seeing everything that can happen to a plane, and they still go up, work the checklist, and then go on to land safely, when I took 4 flights in September I wasn't nervous AT ALL. No sedatives needed! Amazing what a little knowledge can do, huh? So, again, thank you!
@@VladimirNicolici And not everyone has a 34" monitor 2 ' from their face. I watch most videos on a tablet, some on a laptop. Probably lot of folks might be watching on a phone. I agree that ATC probably does not use 3" screens. My 34" monitor is not very portable though. I try to be thankful for what people share, and when giving constructive criticism, I avoid words like obnoxious and try to stay with helpful ideas. And that's my hopefully constructive criticism of your comment...
I'm a controller and this video stresses me out, I think because the target histories in this display aren't lined up with the target position, so it looks like everyone's in a hard left turn... also the localizers and spillout areas aren't depicted like on the real map so it looks like they're just randomly flying somewhere in the direction of the airport and not locked in on parallel finals.
kewkabe SFO finals. What rule are you referencing? We have the option to show the localizers on but as far as I know aren’t required to use them. So we either have a waiver or there’s some obscurity to the rule that lets us not depict them.
For the amount of pairs we make at SFO the amount of RAs we get are generally low. Most of the time during sideby ops the traffic for 28R is on a different frequency than the traffic for 28L. (2 final controllers) We need one pilot to see their pairing traffic before we lose 3 lateral miles or 1000ft vertical separation. Most often both aircraft crew will see each other and pair up nice all the way in without problems. Sometimes one will see the other, but the other is still looking. We will continue to update the traffic but sometimes an RA alerts and they don’t see their pairing traffic that sees them. The FMS bridge visual approach to 28R (not a public publication) and the quiet bridge visual approach to 28R (public) are roughly the same track and are well north of the 28R localizer to help increase the separation between the pair on final until the last minute when both are aligned 750ft apart for their runways. Most RA go arounds I’ve seen are when someone doesn’t fly the FMS or Quiet bridge visual like they are supposed to and heads for the localizer on a charted visual approach. Or when someone starts to drift north or south a little and the other pilot (being on a different frequency) gets a bad feeling about this and starts a climb out of the conflict.
Love listening in to SFO Tower when it's busy. They handle such an intense amount of traffic inbound and out and handle it extremely well. Heard more than a couple pilots say "good job" before switching freq.
i am blessed right now with a window view that overlooks SFO to San Mateo bridge and listening to liveatc while i work is an amazing treat... dunno what ill do when we have to move in 18 mos
I gotta hand it to SF ATC, they sound so calm, precise and focused. This airport is not a joke folks, the probability for a mid air collision is really high and yet they're, really organized.
Been doing survey work recently in the Bay Area (in the departure and arrival paths for OAK, SJC, SFO, etc.) and these controllers are the best to work with. Absolute professionals. Not sure how they do it, but they get us in between the jets like it’s just a normal procedure. We also caused a few TCAS alerts for the airlines as well. All in a day’s work for them!
MrCrystalcranium don’t forget, you also have Oakland and San Jose nearby along with quite a few smaller airports like Moffet to get in your way. Yeah, how they keep that mess semi organized is amazing to me
MrCrystalcranium it’s all porceduralized. Once you start to understand how and why this airplane goes to a certain sector at a certain altitude etc. then it begins to make sense.
Except the traffic was for 28R, there was no danger, since they had reported the traffic in sight, and knew it was there. The crew should have selected TA only, and saved a lot of hassle.
Yeah. I don't think it was a factor. I'm glad the pilot went around anyway but either way there was no danger. There was significant traffic on parallel runways. The computer is bound to go nuts once in a while. That's why we have a pilot. If it was only computer controlled, none of these flights would land.
@@narendranbhaskar Although there didn't seem to be any danger continuing the approach, I'd still follow the RA. You never know what ATC might have missed (these guys are really good but still human).
Interesting altitude confirmation towards the end. Busy, busy, busy; tough enough to schedule them all in but the go around clearly added to the controllers workload.
I will never understand how these controllers are able to do this. It takes a unique talent and a special type of person. It looked like an odd sort of dance watching this. Kudos to the men and women that keep everyone safe.
You just have to have a certain way of thinking. If you can design a project and build it from your head without using like AutoCAD, you would probably make a good air traffic controller. Its about spatial reasoning and being able to think visually. Some people are better at it than others. Oh, and being able to stay cool under pressure!
@@hgbugalou The last sentence might be the hardest thing of all. Some controllers have written that they just don't think about those passengers in the planes that they are responsible for. Better to keep emotions in check. I am an emotional person and thus don't think I would be suited for the task. I would love to pilot a plane, but alas, that is not a possibility for me now. Thanks for the great reply.
@@mikepaz4870 LOL And a gaming machine called "Punch The Pilot" after experiencing frustration with a pilot that keeps messing up the read back 3 or more times. Kinda like Whack-A-Mole😁
Whew! This gave me flashbacks of Daisy Chains at Ft Wolters, Texas during primary helicopter training from 1969. Imagine all these aircraft you saw displayed didn't have ATC and they all converged at once to land, playing dodge airplane on final approach. Shortly after soloing we were given solo missions to fly around looking for white tires that indicated an easy LZ. Then we'd all head back in our trusty Mattel Messerschmidts (TH-55) to land at the heliport. Sometimes 20 -30 at a time converging on final from all directions. A fine shitshow enjoyed by all...if there were ATC then I don't remember it, too busy dodging.
in this kinds of approaches to parallel runways the flight crew can switch the TCAS from TA/RA to TA only, also resolution advisorys are usually inhibited when the radio altimeter is less then 900ft, precisely so you dont have to make a go around based on the RA alone, as long as other sepparation parameters havent been breached
If you search for document DOT-FAA-AFS-420-90, it states the following in regards TCAS and PRM: "When the precision runway monitor (PRM) system was certified to monitor closely spaced approaches (runways as close as 3,000 feet apart) it was recommended that the TCAS be placed in the traffic alert (TA) mode that provides warning but not resolution of conflicts. Since TCAS was not designed for use during parallel approaches, it was assumed that TCAS in the resolution alert (RA) mode might issue an excessive number of false alerts. Since the PRM provides 1-second update rate, sophisticated alert algorithms, and future position predictive software, the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) initially accepted this TA-only procedure. However, ALPA recently has asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to determine the feasibility of leaving the TCAS in the resolution alert (RA) mode throughout a closely spaced approach. The Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) was asked to conduct a data collection and analysis to compare the risk associated with using TCAS set in the RA mode as the only traffic alert system using PRM with TCAS set in the RA mode and to evaluate the potential for false alerts." And it concludes: "The simulation indicated that the target level of safety was not met when TCAS was set in the RA mode and used alone without PRM. That is, when the pilot followed only a TCAS climb or descend instruction without a turn instruction, the target level of safety was not met. The target level of safety was met when using TCAS in conjunction with PRM. That is, when the TCAS climb or descend instruction was coupled with a turn instruction from the air traffic controller using PRM the target level of safety was met. Therefore, if a pilot responds to a TCAS RA alert, then the pilot must also follow the PRM controller turn instruction to meet the target level of safety using the standard 500-foot TCV. The investigation also considered five scenarios consisting of normal aircraft operations without the occurrence of blunders and evasive maneuvers for the evaluation of the false alert rate while using PRM with TCAS in the RA mode. The five scenarios can be grouped into three distinct categories; those with parallel localizers and runways spaced 3,400 feet apart, those with one localizer offset 3 degrees with runways spaced 3,000 feet apart, and a SOIA approach to runways spaced 750 feet apart. The simulation indicated that the false alert rate was not excessive during any of the three general conditions that were simulated. Therefore, the TCAS may be set to the RA mode during dual parallel approaches with PRM without excessive false alerts."
Last time I checked, "Roger" is not a readback after being given a heading. Indicative of the casual attitude which caused problems some minutes later. Then ATC actually asks Dynasty if they are following the RA (gasp!) instead of the sterling advice of the controller.
This job is insane. I dont know, but would be fantastic to have SW assitance to double check every possible conflict base on actual and predicted data. Props on them. Good video !!!
@VASAviation Could you upload an ATC video featuring the American Eagle flight that slid off the runway at Chicago O’Hare 6 days ago? (If you don’t have it in the works already(?))
How much do these controllers get paid? The traffic seems crazy and surely they need to perform perfectly in every minute of their job. Specially at SFO with two other major airports and even the small San Carlos one which is so near the San Mateo bridge
I've flown into and out of SFO as a passenger. It's a tricky airport for one, that the Runways are shaped like an X, and that the whole airport is situated on a peninsula within the Bay Area.
For those who don't get it, in Mandarin and Cantonese, the pronounced syllable for the number four is the same as the word for "dead" or "death", but are tonally different.
Why? They were on short final and had the traffic in sight. They were probably just following company SOP. Press a toga button and wait for instructions from a (pissed off) controller. Kinda is what it is..
Alex Thomas alright alright calm down slugger. Just trying to complement people that have an extremely challenging job executing in a high pressure situation.
Concur , The vast majority of Chinese carriers do not allow hand flying until a mile from the threshold and positive rate , gear up , flaps up , auto pilot on at 500 ‘ AGL. His Aviation English was perfect
Alex Thomas Controllers don’t get pissed off cause they do anticipate these kinds of occurrences. In an ILS PRM approach they expect you to leave the XPDR in TA/RA mode for possible breakout maneuvers. NO pilots are allowed to ignore a RA in ANY situation because there is always the possibility that the traffic seen not being the traffic causing the RA.
That's what i thought. With all the traffic around them and the dynasty pilots had them in sight was the go around necessary? Or no matter what if you get a ra you must follow no exceptions?
luttes72 yea if they saw the intruder aircraft no go around necessary, (at least according to my airline’s rules), a lot of pilots don’t know that and end up going around in SFO
As a passenger flying into SF all the time it always looks so calm out the window as the other aircraft gets closer and stays in sight all the way through to the landing. It kinda feels like we're racing the other plane sometimes. On a clear day the spacing that looks so tight on the radar screen feels fairly large when actually looking out the window. Left-to-right seems like it ought to be easy, but I wonder if they ever get the front-to-back spacing wrong. -Matt
Junker Zn The front to back spacing you’re talking about is called compression. We are required to have a certain distance between aircraft landing depending on their weight and wake turbulence output. Let’s say I need 5 miles between two aircraft, if I don’t get it, then the aircraft behind has to go around and be resequenced. It’s absolutely a factor.
Well, except in this case, where it's being overly cautious. But, that's the crew's fault for not configuring it correctly despite knowing the would be within a couple hundred feet of other aircraft and that would make the TCAS upsetti.
@@ryanflying5781 I was referring to setting the TCAS/transponder to TA only mode. In the TA-only mode,the equipment still performs the surveillance function (i.e. it scans for proximate traffic) but it will only generate TAs. Other aircraft can still generate uncoordinated RAs against the aircraft which has its TCAS in TA-only mode.
@@MillionFoul Setting TCAS TA only mode in the air under normal ops is probably highly against SOP and maybe even against ICAO regulations. TA only is designed for the case of limited maneuverability, due to for e.g. failures, so that other conflicting traffic gets an RA around you - not for normal OPS. On the other hand, the China Airlines crew did everything by the book. They followed the TCAS RA and announced "Callsign, TCAS RA" on frequency. A+ in my opinion. After the Überlingen disaster in 2002, following TCAS resolution advisories is mandatory, even if an air traffic controller says something else.
So, did Delta have a TCAS-RA? Is this a common consequence of parrellel landings and if so would a pilot more familiar with SFO continue to land? Serious questions...not a professional pilot, just love aviation! Thanks in advance!
So, did Delta have a TCAS-RA? Would seem most unlikely, given that the crew didn't action any resolution. Is this a common consequence of parrellel landings? It's not exactly common, but nor would it be considered overly uncommon as well. Would a pilot more familiar with SFO continue to land? Definitely should not. (On further analysis this appears to be incorrect for some American operators who switch off the RA part of their TCAS.)
And that is not even displaying the parallel takeoffs on the other two runways which happen to cross the two arrival runways! So they often get 2 parallel departures, two landings, ... and so on! It's crazy!
The issue as I understand is: If on ILS controllers must bracket parallel 28L & 28R because at SFO the two runways are closer than normal Intl Airports. The Visual Approach allows ATC to sequence aircraft closer in parallel sequence because pilots are under Visual Separation. SFO isn't going to ever widen the distance between the two parallel runways, so its only a matter of time before something happens by mistake.
Mike Schultze read my comment above for the past debacles Landing simultaneously it feels as if you are in formation. On a clear moonless light you can look up in the sky and see two sets of landing lights turning R and L for final , about 10 on either glide slope
Or right 2 aircraft on parallel app rwy 28 L,R one went around due to TCAS What happened to the other one why they haven't received TCAS alert as well 🤔?
In such parallel approaches, when you maintain visual separation, usually TCAS should be in TA mode, not TA/RA. Think, that is why only one flight performed Go around.
I like the part where the pilot says "We have a TCAS RA" and tower goes "oh, okay, are you following it?" Did he really expect the pilot to come back with "nah, you can ignore TCAS..."
In some times you need to ignore the TCAS; But better sure than sorry TCAS RA shouldn't activate in PRM as the RA function get's deactivated automatically in the final phase of the aproach (sensitivity gets less in less altitude). There may be a slight seperation problem or there was a problem with the GPS receiver. In perfect visual in sight situations without power/without engine you may land in very close proximity. There may be even to much workload in the cockpit to only follow visual seperation and the Delta may had flow with 3 pilotes, with two pilotes for the visial scanning of the sky.
@@losttownstreet3409 Never ignore a TCAS instruction unless doing so would be dangerous to safe operation of the flight, including during PRM guidance.
If they have the other aircraft in sight, they don't need to follow the TCAS RA if they believe they can proceed with the landing safely. Note: in the speicifc case of PRM parallel landings like these. Not that you can ignore all RA's just as long as you can see the other aircraft.
I'm not a pilot, just a fan of these videos, so I was mostly joking. I'm sure there's times where TCAS can be ignored. But I feel as though if it were me, I'd hear the TCAS warning and assume a plane I DIDN'T see was causing it, and just instinctively do whatever it told me to
@@aaronsakulich4889 Not a pilot either, but you can see what aircraft is causing the conflict on a screen, probably you'll be monitoring the parallel aircraft there (and visually, more importantly). But if you don't have 100% awareness, it's never bad to follow TCAS. Might go around, but you're safe. Why you might want to ignore RA, or turn it off entirely, is when it is activating falsely, which can happen at parallel approaches; sometimes it is written in the approach procedures to turn OFF TCAS RA and only have TA.
Kudos to the Dynasty Asian pilot for speaking perfect English!...No possibility of miscommunication. On another note, I don't know how ATC at these major airports do it. They are constantly giving instructions. The stress level must be enormous. I know the planes follow a standard pattern into both runways but still, it's an unbelievable responsibility to keep all of this straight in your head and should an emergency arise...holy crap!
Did the TCAS alert occur because he was doing a normal, parallel landing? (this requires planes to fly closer than normal, but being side-by-side, they avoid eachother's turbulence)
3 levels of professionalism 1 from the CAL pilot 2 from the Tower 3 from @VASAviation for making such a professional level of representation ! Kudos man !
Questin. ATC advised traffic no factor. shouldn't tat mean they should've been fine in ignoring the ra and also, what the usual procedure in having the ra on instead of just the ta on final?
What was the problem? Visual approach, traffic in sight. RA was generated because two aircraft were close to each other. But this is visual approach and visual separation. The next pair SWA2233 and UAL643 is going to be another RA? Some explanation is needed.
Could someone help me understand the situation? Dynasty CAL004 is cleared for 28L; Delta DAL1588 is cleared for 28R. Was the TCAS RA due to DAL getting too close and/or potentially overtaking CAL?
Astute observation. RA’s are coordinated for TCAS II equipped aircraft-which they probably were-also assumes TCAS was not mechanically deferred. Odds are the other aircraft just disregarded it, because no one actually follows an RA on the closely spaced parallels into SFO with traffic in sight. If they did, every other arrival would be going around LOL
Captain Jose Omar The majority of Chinese carriers mandate 100% ILS capture. They are in huge trouble and disciplined for hand flying ....until one mile from threshold . On departure , positive rate : gear up , flaps up , autopilot engaged 500 ‘ agl . Their policies have contributed to many accidents as they lack basic stick and rudder skills. After Air Canada’s shenanigans most carriers mandate ILS for SFO
It’s not a requirement, but we will give most foreign carriers an ILS approach. Not just Taiwanese airlines. It’s easier for them. But if we need them on a visual to a keep a tight final and avoid two ILS approaches side by side we will do it. After air Canada lined up for the wrong taxiway we had to issue ILS approaches at night for a bit. But now we can issue charted visuals again.
Why did the TCAS RA happen? Did one of the pilots line up on the wrong runway? As far as I can tell Delta 1588 was on 28R and the China Airlines 004 one was on 28L. Parallel landings are nothing new. I would really like to know what happened here.
I guess the China Airlines had RA activated when only TA would be enough, and they felt insecure, maybe not sure they had understood the instructions in American English correctly, so they obey and go around. Maybe one of the pilots thought - did my colleague pilot really grasp everything correctly or did I miss anything when English is not their native language? And safety comes first, there is no time to really think it over, you must act immediately. Also have in mind that China is not a Democracy, so some pilots might get their licences and work permits thanks to contacts or family ties rather than by showing the highest competence. This is sadly common in many non-democratic places where everything can be fixed with money and contacts.
Also if China 004 was listening to the radio when Delta said he has the traffic in sight Taiwanese crew would have situational awareness and could continue.
Now, TCAS is a system based on both aircraft’s transponders, their RAs should always come in pairs. Which means Delta 1588 disregarded an RA for a reason not related to terrain or performance limits (at 7,000 ft, possible to descend). Someone should be in trouble...
“Everyone Go Around - Amazon Package Drone busted the Class Bravo ... again! Amazon, for the last time, please stay below below 1500 feet!” Amazon Drone: “I’m sorry Dave, I can’t do that!”
Ret Captain. With visual confirmation, an RA can be used as advisory only. Traffic conflict on parallel runways with known traffic is not a threat. Thanks
@@ljfinger correct, as procedure you're supposed to put your TCAS on TA ONLY so you don't get an RA. Every paired visual approach like this would be an RA otherwise.
They work of the majority of people. I’ve flown in and out of SFO for years and only seen one of these and heard of this one. When I flew in Alaska I’ve seen people wait for Dynasty to land before they’d land. FYI it’s NorCal Approach not SFO
The RA was for the ship on the paralell RWY? Why the heck did they not reconfigure their TCAS for close airprox mode? Everyone who flys a 100,000,000$ ship to KFSO should be aware of this.
@@VASAviation thanks but I meant that they should have adjusted the alerts for operations at KSFO, knowing that there will likely be RAs issued. The conflicting ship obviously had no issues.
From my experience flying into SFO, the jepp charts advise TA ONLY for this reason, TCAS doesn't like the spacing. Some carriers have restrictions in place that prevent them for disabling RA, perhaps why Dynasty had RA still up and functional. With RA enabled, you don't just ignore the RA if it speaks up. Good job by all
@@w1rth Yeah sure. I'm pretty sure I also have said "Okay" on the radio at some point. But this here really caught my ear. - Some people in the comments blamed the CAL pilot for not being familiar with the SFO procedures. (reg. TCAS) Might be right, but at least he sticked to ICAO phraseology. With Chinese accent, tough :-)
Can anybody explain why SFO is using such a complex and dangerous method? In FRA we have 2 (now 3) parallel runways and they just fly left, right, left, right etc. It seems much safer and the same amount of traffic per hour
Jemand, It is complex at first. It’s not dangerous. The runways are 750ft apart at SFO. If we used standard separation rules we would have to have 3-8 miles between each aircraft regardless of what runway they’re on. To run a stagger as you suggest we still have to get visual separation (meaning the pilots can see the other aircraft). A stagger is less efficient than a sideby operation like this. I assure you it is safe. We have to keep standard radar separation (usually 3 miles laterally and 1,000ft. Vertical) until one of the pilots reports that they see the aircraft they’re going to pair with. Then we can vector them onto their finals together. And it’s up to the pilots to maintain “visual separation”. If a sighting doesn’t happen we will break one aircraft off the approach. Safety is never compromised.
Why are they listening to the TCAS alert? They know nothing will happen and everyone is flying their approach. On certain airports the pilot fly their approach with terrain warnings ringing all the time, but they know they are in save margins. So why not here?
You’re doing an amazing job on every single video; this one I think was one of the best I’ve seen in terms of it being so educational, I learned a lot, thanks to your editing and explanations. Thank you VASAviation!
What's have all the planes take off and land at the same time. Albany airport in Upstate New York they have maybe thirty flights the whole day and they have 12 take off at the same time in the morning and the same thing with The landings I don't understand why they can't space it out better I watch the whatever it's called that's on the 1090 megahertz for my local area and at night there is nothing for like 8 hours Then it gets crazy for 2 hours and then it goes to just the stuff going over head way up high I wish we had High-Speed rail We really need those 300 mile per hour trains here in America
Look at the bright side , there were NO AIR CANADA flights choosing the wrong runway or taxi way to land on . Plus Captain Sum Ting Wong and First Officer Weeee Too Lou of Asiana had the day off
@@stevenazar9940 I thought that CAL was landing on 28L and DAL on 28R. I've landed at SFO with another plane directly next to me, so presumably(?) this isn't the problem. Did one plane or another stray left or right of the centerline?
Dynasty couldn't follow directions 1/3 of the time. Kept being told speed 170kts and never slowed down! Of course they caught up with the traffic they were following because they didn't slow down until they got the TCAS alert.
That is insane. The onus has been transferred to the pilots. ATC tells them what to look out for, so don't hit that. i realize that i don't know jack sh*t, but this situation can't be maintained, can it? I know ATC and all the pilots are highly trained, extremely intelligent people, so then why use a system that is 1 step away from chaos? It makes no sense to me. Please someone explain it. This is the best we can do in 2019? Really?
C.J. T it’s not one step away from chaos. It may look like that. But it’s a finely tuned orchestra that has rules, regulations, and procedures for each individual aircraft. I don’t want to sit here and type out a complete explanation of ATC as much as you wouldn’t want to read that. Lol. But here’s a quick example of a few things you may not know as you look at this video. All IFR aircraft are separated by 3 miles laterally or 1,000ft vertically until the pilot says I have them in sight. Then they can decrease the separation. Wake turbulence is taken into account. Depending on the size of the aircraft in front, the controller has to build a 3,3.5,5,6,7,8 mile hole to accommodate for wake turbulence. We have airspace we have to stay in with horizontal lines as well as vertical (altitude) limits. And we have rules about speeds and when we can turn onto final etc. It’s very organized.
If it was an RA with Delta, Delta would have had to comply as well. Since they didn't, it was likely a traffic advisory and not an RA. CAL's English needs work as they all seemingly do over there.
Yes they should build a better airport with no X, that is the most worrying part to me and they come in over the Bay with possible strong gusts very close to another Boeing or even an A380 next to you... I mean, one little mistake or maneuvering problem and they might get too close sideways. And add the language difficulties with foreign pilots. I wouldn't fly into SFO as it is today. I'd prefer flying to LAX and rent a car and drive up.
It’s safe. We keep all airplanes separated by 3 miles laterally 1,000 vertically until we get a sighting. After that the pilots are maintaining visual separation all the way in. LAX to SFO is a long unnecessary drive to avoid something that’s never happened.
Dynasty didn’t follow procedures. In SFO, you switch your TCAS to TA (traffic advisories) only due to the close proximity of other planes. That’s why the Delta didn’t do a go around. They had theirs off like they’re suppose to. In SFO they have a transgression zone that’s highly monitored by ATC and takes away the need for TCAS RA’s. Those Chinese pilots just cost the company 10k for a go around. 🤦♂️👍
I've flown into SFO many times. Not sure how you got the idea that you switch off RA but I don't think so and I never have. Do you have any evidence of that supposed procedure?
All_Roads they aren’t doing ILS PRM approaches. They’re doing FMS Bridge Visual 28R. You turn off the TCAS RA, otherwise you’ll get an RA. Ask why the Delta plane didn’t get an RA. Their transponders talk to each other and will give opposing commands. Also, with an ILS PRM is staggered, hence why you keep the TCAS in RA mode.
Just out of curiosity, any of you guys employed by an actual airline? I just looked up in my company’s manual and it specifically says it’s permitted to turn your transponder to TA only in non PRM approaches to prevent unnecessary RA commands into closely spaced approaches. It’s not unique to my airline, it’ll be the same at all majors and others. Every single time I go into SFO and I see a plane joining next to me that’s maintaining visual separation, I turn my transponder to TA. Have no clue how this is confusing to you all......
I think it’s absolutely disgraceful the way the men on the radio continually FAT SHAME various people and airplane thingys . I thought San Francisco being so progressive and tolerant of all genders , sexual preferences , religion and ethnicity would do better than to FAT SHAME. Those poor them / the people’s constantly being called heavy. This is government sponsored BULLYING. We should love all airplanes. Skinny ones , gender dysphoric airplanes and yes OVERWEIGHT planes. Please stop saying United Heavy , Heavy triple seven.
![[REAL ATC] Resolution Advisory - COLLISION ALERT - in busy San Francisco!](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
