"I can't have this conversation with you" | PILOT GETS FRUSTRATED after Long Delays!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 พ.ย. 2023
- Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASAviation
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
I did a VIDEO ANALYSIS, including Real SFO controller's commentary, throwing more light to this situation -> th-cam.com/video/4zHxdn8oz20/w-d-xo.htmlsi=eIZq4oJ1roOyXY-n
Could it have been due to rules regarding the length of the flight, fatigue, or EASA regulations?
In the world there are a lot of airlines it is prohibited visual app at night.
We couldn't when I flew for Qatar.
nothing to do with being in a modern aircraft or not. A visual approach with separation mantained by the pilot is what it is. The technique is the same regardless of the aircraft.
The point here is that the ATC screw up Lufthansa on the landing sequence and they were running out of fuel. Then the Lufthansa guys used some bad wording that the ATC certainly noticed and got upset, and replied with a "say again?". After that they fucked up Lufthansa even more and forced them to divert.
The company policy shouldn't be discussed. Lufthansa know their shit.
well, I think the simple answer to this question is that Lufthansa here is being very German, regulations are regulations.
I'd say it's a holdover from earlier days and nobody figured out how to get the rule changed yet
"we're low on fuel"
"this conversation is over"
what in the actual fuck
Maybe the pilot should have called the bluff and declared a fuel emergency
DLH is a professional airline so they would not lie. Probably a couple more minutes of "undetermined delay" and they would have to declare that. Than straight to final and all the sequence would be... As they politely explained before.
@@AlexDaBigBaumthis is exactly what I'd b very tempted to do lol just to troll them. Pan pan x2 fuel request whatever rw ils lol
Go to Oakland or crash...you can choose...
@@maltimoto That's basicly a choice, given by the controller.
Totally unacceptable.
In 2013 after the Asiana crash at SFO as well as numerous missed approaches into SFO by other foreign aircraft, the FAA recommended that foreign airliners avoid visual approaches into SFO. It’s likely that Lufthansa’s policy was shaped by this FAA advice.
Now this is very interesting given some of the assumption comments by some of the defensive Americans on various threads on this video.
Agree… I think the policy changed as well after the Air Canada incident…
I find it preposterous that the controller behaves in this condescending way towards the LH crew. Would’ve gotten a number to call from me😅
It’s also many European Carriers explicitly preventing visual approaches at night time.
My own company’s Ops Manual specifically “prohibits visual approaches during the hours of night time unless part of a published Circle to Land Procedure preceded by an instrument approach to a reciprocal runway”.
Some are ILS all the time into SFO.
@@jpmasters-aus With SFO's reputation, it's hard to imagine anyone defending them
I'm a controller myself, but this behaviour puts me to shame. Even if, for whatever reason, I have a problem with the pilot, behaving professionally is a very important thing in this job. To be honest, there are situations where I sometimes have to bite my arse to avoid reacting childishly, but we can't afford to do that and it's a skill that every controller needs to have! We are service and safety provider to our "customers".
I want to be a pilot so bad and knowing people like you are there to help is appreciated. Theres no room for personal issues
@@sncy5303 I can see where you're coming from, but as a german I can assure you he was mainly focused and professional. We are just more direct. Things like "your sequence will be f*ed up" would be just something I would say to try and REDUCE the harshness of my statement. But I can see how this can be interpreted as arrogant.
Totally agree with you. Let me ask you something. This is not the first time I hear an ATC behaving like that. The ones in NY are notorious for that. What’s the reason? Is it a cultural thing? Stress which I know that job has plenty of? A combination?
@@dashandtuch7183LOL please pass on to all other Germans, this does *not* reduce the harshness of any statement
@@FlyNAA We'll have our annually meeting next week, I'll let them know 😜
As a retired air traffic controller I am thoroughly embarrassed by this. You are there to provide a service, not to play God. Clearing them for an ILS would have been a minor inconvenience, something that they are paid very well to deal with.
Minor inconvenience? Watch the latest video
they love making everything complicated, it's beyond unacceptable and foolish, the pilot literally said i'm almost out of fuel.....🤦♂️
Silly question by what would have happened if the pilot declared an "emergency" to force their hands?
Where did you control at? It seems it’s easy to armchair quarterback other controllers when you aren’t really sure what’s going on and the rules / procedures involved. Most controllers I know, know they don’t know a ton about other controllers airspace and procedures. Especially some place as unique as SFO and their sideby approaches.
@@Comment-sw5rzWell it’s probably not a great idea to declare an emergency when there is no emergency. As far as the paperwork and discipline that follows that I can’t speak too. But if Lufthansa was really running low on fuel the first thing they would do is declare “min fuel”. (Minimum fuel) Which is not an emergency. It lets the controllers know that they can’t take any undue delay or they may end up at emergency levels of fuel. The next step is to declare a fuel emergency. The approach controllers will vector them straight to the closest runway and clear everyone else out of their way so they can land immediately, most likely with emergency vehicles and fire trucks following them down the runway as they land. All the other planes that were broken off the final and made to spin in the air to make room for the emergency will be delayed, and eventually vectors back inbound. It can take a few hours to clean up an unexpected mess like that if it’s really busy. Or a few minutes if there’s just a few aircraft that were delay vectored.
No matter what situation or circumstance was happening that we might not know about yet, that angry “This conversation is over!” from the so called ATC is when he became an absolute liability to the aviation industry.
Get him out of that tower. I hope Lufthansa report this and that there’s an investigation.
I really hope they do and the guy should at least get a notice for this behavior. We are talking about safety for the passengers here ..
To declare low fuel and basically be ignored is beyond ridiculous
@@sammy61187he didn't declare low fuel.
It wasn't angry, it was a "I've got 50 planes in the air and you aren't more special than the others, so stop blocking the frequency we are all using and if we cannot get you in then divert per SOP".
ATC was correct in this case.
@@alan_davis so how come the other planes are more special than this one?
Unfortunately as a European airline pilot, who flies frequently to the USA, there's been an endemic problem with a small minority of US controllers who have this 'god complex' and not accommodating something that isn't part of their interpretation of custom and practice. You, in any way, question their decision, they become defensive and confrontational, whereas it is often a simple question, sometimes just for clarification, oftentimes they expect you to know every little idiosyncrasy of their airport, despite the fact I might not have been there for 2 years or more. I've had it also where the controller has taken us out of the arrival sequence as punishment for questioning his planning, no malicious intent. We're the ones up there flying, not him!
There also seems to be a lack of sharing of the plan with pilots. Quite often in SFO we're turned right, out over the pacific ocean and given no indication as the length of delay and the reason for it, could be 5 minutes or 15 minutes, we're not told why and no sharing of what the plan is. In Europe (and especially from my experience of flying into the UK), they share their mental model of mileage to touchdown or their reasons for doing something that is out of the ordinary. The US would do well to visit European air traffic control centers and learn from them and share good practices.
Thank you for this insider's view of the entire issue. Really makes a difference when actual pilots and ATC staff contribute to the conversation
This has been going on for decades by controlers .
The most egregious part was surpassing the expected hold time with no further info given apparently, and then adding 10-15 minutes further. That is sure to raise the stress levels of the Lufthansa pilots.
Omg how egregious, the ATC couldn't use their crystal ball and tell the airplane when the ceilings and traffic sequencing will work out. SO EGREGIOUS
@@gotacallfromvishal OK Vishnu
@@paddyohenry6428 that is right i am holy vishnu where's your parent/mom at
@@gotacallfromvishal you must work for that crappy norcal atc
@@budguy21 you're right, i do. we are never satisfied until the flight sim kids shit a brick. now where's your mom
More problems with controllers in SFO. Ridiculous. I’m on the pilots side with this one.
Just extend the thought process from a Lufthansa cooperation standpoint. If they start looking at SFO and possibly deem it too risky from a financial and/or safety standpoint and drop the destination from their roster, that could have a ripple effect on the other Star Alliance members that use SFO as a long haul connection and share the high safety requirements with Lufthansa regarding night approach.
@@SB-cz9vo doubt very much lufthansa drop it for them its a major destination and money maker for multiple routes from europe
@@roobear78Hey Oakland took them just fine. I would love to fly non-stop to Europe from Oakland…not that they can board those planes there
@@roobear78 If it was just this one F up from SFO, I would totally agree with you. To remain a major destination you need a solid reputation as you are supposed to act as a backup for other destinations close by and this one added malice to that ranking.
When will people realize this isn’t sfo controllers. These guys are in Sacramento lol
I feel for the pilot, stuck between a rock and a hard place.. the controller has a dangerous attitude to this IMO and it should be looked into.
The attitude wasn't dangerous, just bad
2:47 is the most disturbing part to me
Phone calls😮
@@jbreezy101The Lufthansa pilot was trying to have a protracted argument with an approach controller in heavily congested class B airspace.
@@nicholai1008 when he asked 'how many more minutes?' that was a critical question that needed an answer, so he could decide to divert or remain in pattern, and not argumentative.
What a ridiculous situation! Well handled by the LH crew and I'd be as baffled as they sounded...
Flying in and around Europe I've never heard anyone ever doing a night visual, let alone being made to divert because you're not allowed to perform one...
A night visual is common in the States and as you can tell just as safe. However, not being able to get them in because of them requesting an ILS baffles me too. This is a San Francisco NorCal approach thing. Our liberal government has really hurt ATC in some areas, including NorCal.
@@Kaipeternicolas really? What does a liberal government have to do with this? Do you think the POTUS appoints and schedules controllers? If you think about it we’re in the position we’re in when Reagan fired all of them for striking. If they could strike they could force the FAA to fully man all vacancies and allow them to work normal hours. I work in aviation so I do know what I’m talking about. One last thing look at vacancies over the last 20 years. It’s consistently low no matter what party is in control or can your pea brain figure something like that out? Always gotta be someone else’s fault.
@@KaipeternicolasNorCal, including SFO ATCT has seemed to have constant problems and I can't seem to figure out why
@@Kaipeternicolas The ILS request means a lot of separation rules change. It's not just the 3-6 mile spacing (heavy), it's also either forcing a gap in the traffic for the parallel runway or using the closely spaced parallel approach procedure. If everybody else is doing visuals and there's no gaps, I can see the SFO specific headache.
Night visuals are the norm here you just always need to back it up with an approach whether that be an ILS or an RNP. When the entire sequence is based upon visual separation rules and you now have to separate for a full ILS it causes ATC to have to change the sequence. That said there’s no way that the controllers are that incompetent to sequence Lufthansa in especially during some of the slower hours for SFO. Just another example of how bad it’s gotten with NorCal/SFO since COVID. Some major retraining and restructuring needs to happen.
I am a retired Lufthansa B747 pilot myself. I flew very often from Frankfurt to SFO in the past and I know that it is a very busy airport with lots of traffic. I can assure that according to Lufthansa procedures, which is stated very clearly in the OM-A (operations manual part A), it is not allowed to do OWN VISUAL SEPARATION to other traffic during a visual approach AT NIGHT. The only exception where this is allowed AT NIGHT is the home base airport Frankfurt. And that is for safety reasons and not just for fun. The Visual approach procedure as part of an IFR flight at night is allowed, but in that case the ATC controller must assure traffic separation and not the pilot. The A350, which arrived from Munich this day was 2 hours delayed. That is the reason why it arrived at nighttime, normally the Munich flight arrives at day time and then they could have done their own visual separation.
Once in SFO, I did a go around and missed approach, during day time. Because an approach controller vectored us on a base turn directly in the direction of another B737 and we got way too close. Our TCAS system generated a warning and we did a go around. The controller was surely lost and after that mistake the supervisor was in charge.
to be fair, i'd be upset if i was lufthansa too. being vectored around with no reason given, hope they had a conversation over the phone. some sort of report was definitely filed here.
I'm quite certain that the reason is pretty simple, and they could see it on their magic box showing ADB traffic inbound. There was most likely a string of aircraft, spaced for visual approaches, approaching both runways, without openings.
Now if Lufthansa operations had bothered to coordinate with SFO about this issue ahead of time, flow management would've likely built in a buffer for it. But they clearly didn't, and all other traffic showed up as scheduled, leaving no pop-up openings.
Yea at that point fuck NorCal, just declare the fuel emergency. LH pilots don't have FAA licenses anyway, so who cares...
Lufthansa gave the reason. Allegedly they aren't allowed by their company to fly VFR at night. I have no way to know if that's true or just something this pilot made up to get out of doing the visual approach. If it is true, they should have checked on what type of approach would be in use during their preflight planning.
@@MikeDCWelda visual approach isn’t VFR lmao. It’s an IFR clearance
Completely disagree. Not being able to do visual at night is strange, assuming the weather is good. This is on the company, not ATC. The reason for the delay should be extremely obvious, even if they're asking. The controllers aren't going to delay several other aircraft due to this strange policy.
Surely ATC knows their customers well enough to know they had to take the ILS….this seems very odd.
My thoughts exactly, I'm gonna guess the controller was having a bad day
Instrument approach will require more spacing while visual approach does not. Visual approach is preferred in good weather to allow more landings and to reduce congestion.
@@2Phast4Rocket Air Canada Flight 759 has entered the chat
@@SamGoat13Right, Air Canada pilots are even worse than LH
That assumes that ATC management see the airlines as customers or inconvenient operators they have to deal with. My limited observation around this area of ATC, operators are an annoying inconvenience to many working in ATC there. I know there are excellent staff in the area, but it does seem to have a bad reputation. I don’t know if that is poor leadership or what.
Scary stuff. The pilot was 100% right. The fact they could not get him set up for ILS for nearly 40 minutes is a total joke. To fuel divert because they were too busy is just insane. SFO might as well stop taking night ops for DHL flights I guess.
Fly into SFO and you'll understand where this crew went wrong. The situation sucks but totally avoidable had the crew not waited until the very last minute on the arrival to notify they needed an ILS.
@@erauprcwaThey were at 11,000. That, coupled with the penalty vectors were plenty of time to get space made. Sounds like SFO needs to limits ops if they can’t accommodate long haul carriers at night.
SFO is a busy air port, the arrival sequences are built but other controls 100's of miles away. There's not always an easy spot to split someone in who wants a different approach that requires more space.
I’m on the pilots side with this one.
They refused the instructions the ATC gave them claiming "company procedures" as their excuse. Why should the other traffic that is willing to comply with instructions be punished to accommodate someone who is not. The Lufthansa pilots should have planned their flight better, either by uplifting enough fuel to delay until they could be cleared in or making a different airport their intended destination.
@@MikeDCWeld Company procedures are made for a reason and pilots should not deviate from it unless a very very good reason such as an emergency. In this case the pilots did well by staying within SOP ( and not doing that might likely result in loss of job). How would the pilots have known that on this day at this time ATC will decide to allow only visual approaches?. Unless it is stated in the NOTAM beforehand this is not something the pilots could have planned for. Also this is a schedule flight, the pilots cannot randomly just make another airport their intended destination. In this case they finally chose to divert to their alternate which was the correct decision as they cannot stay up forever. It is to be said that ATC also shares responsibility for the safety of these aircraft hence they need to take different aircraft requirements into consideration when planning these procedures
@@darylonezime8714 Because within an hour of their arrival, they would get an ATIS that would SPECIFICALLY tell them to plan for the visual approaches into Runway 28L and 28R. They should've coordinated this information WELL before they started the arrival so control could sequence them better.
Not to mention, other airplanes are on a visual approach. For example, the RNAV visual runway 28R puts you almost at a 45 degree angle into the runway until 5 mile final. If you're on 28L, you MUST have visual contact with that airplane landing on 28R otherwise you might have a conflict.
Under visual conditions, if you can see something, you should avoid it. SFO wouldn't do a visual, unless you can see. So the Lufthansa crew, while following their company SOP, they also refused to SEE other traffic when they could literally see outside their window, making doing their ILS approach into SFO to be very difficult to sequence them into the airport. SFO is NOT an easy airport to operate into and out of and all crew MUST be prepared to go there and know the standard operating procedures for the area.
@@darylonezime8714 Issued: 01/14/2022 1647 (UTC)Effective: 02/05/2022 1200 (UTC)
Northern California TRACONLetter to Airmen: LTA-NCT-64
Subject: San Francisco Airport Charted Visual Flight Procedures
It is a notam. It has been effective for well over a year at this point.
@@MikeDCWeldso you know it is not company procedure?
Declaring minimum fuel could have prompted NorCal to delay vector north and south arrivals to provide enough space. Never in 38 years did I have Approach deny me a full ILS.
Yet another symptom of the complete lack of civility in America in 2023. I’m sick to f*cking death of this country.
Indeed... How many times have you had to deal with NorCal, Oakland Center and SFO Approach or Seattle Center/Approach? I remember a few instances where I encountered "bad" (some might call it worse) attitudes.
Just wow! Someone needs to lose their job over this!
Lufthansa, next time; declare minimum fuel, then declare an emergency and land wherever you damn please.
Then write a report so this gets attention.
@@somestuffithoughtyoumightl6985 However, if the Lufthansa flight was not at minimum fuel, and declared minimum fuel, that might carry consequences for the PIC. And if the flight was at minimum fuel, TRACON would have likely vectored them directly to OAK rather than SFO anyway, due to heavy traffic on the approach to SFO. I suspect the PIC likely realized that and why he reluctantly accepted clearance to OAK. Basically, his options were limited at that point, and declaring an emergency in an attempt to land at SFO would have created major issues for all involved and possibly his professional carer if no actual emergency existed, and even if an actual emergency had and OAK was available, OAK would have likely been the better option anyway.
Given my familiarity with the area, if I were in his location south of SFO and OAK and had an actual emergency I'd likely choose OAK over SFO, due to less traffic and two straight-in runway options, or possibly SJC if I had to get on the Ground ASAP
@@jackoneil3933 I don’t know their Op specs, but it sounded like they were getting very close to, or at minimum fuel. Since there was absolutely no reason for this unprofessional behavior from NorCal, continuing into emer fuel would have given the crew legal right to demand direct SFO. At the subsequent investigation, there would be some explaining to do as to why Lufthansa had to hold so long. Never accept a pushy controller’s ego driven behavior. Luckily this behavior is pretty rare in my experience. Hopefully someone from FSDO sees this video.
I fly internationally frequently. American controllers act as if you've flown into their airport 1000 times before and then belittle you if you don't understand some non standard phrase or procedure.
American ATC refuse to use standard ICAO phraseology
US ATC are easily among the least standard in the world.
@@TheNapalmFTWwell because it’s the USA airspace. ICAO is advisory to all not the law.
Unfortunately it is the same in Europe. If you are flying into an airport you should know the procedures.
@@DontUputThatEvilOnMe Yes. On the other hand it is the job of the ATC to help the pilot not tell the pilot or airline how to do fly. FAA recommends foreign airlines do what Lufthansa did. SFO knows it. SFO knows Lufthansa policy, because this isn't day #1. If SFO isn't going to land a plane using ILS they need to be straight up and say divert because we aren't going to do it.
That “ We are running out of fuel sir” just brings back memories of the Avianca 052 and poor atc management
It wasn't poor atc management in this case. ATC doesn't know your fuel load. They inform you of the situation. If they can accommodate you, they will but as they were told, there would be a delay. If you can't handle that delay, what are your intentions and what is your alternate?
This is a common aviation practice. Happens all the time. They were given an opportunity to come in and do their approach, but they refused to maintain visual separation... which is what all pilots have to do PERIOD when you're flying an airplane, even on an ILS.
Very odd situation, especially at the same airport where the Air Canada 759 incident happened partly due to the use of visual approaches at night.
No, the Air Canada crew messed up by not backing themselves up with an instrument reference.
@@erauprcwa Most incidents are because "someone messed up". What you want to do is avoid situations where you can mess up, and reduce the impact when you do.
@@hubbeli1074 Yes, which is why you BACK UP a visual approach with an ILS or some other ground or satellite based navigation aid to keep you on track and glidepath.
These goddamn controllers should be ashamed of themselves. They remind me of the worst kind of colleagues I have who dont care about providing a service and are so smug about pilots who they think are being difficult but fail to see that they are the ones in the wrong... No professionalism on display here at all.
Imagine driving on the highway during rush hour. You get traffic jams. Imagine, you start slowing cars down in the back, it extends the traffic jam even further down the line. Well, instead of staying on the highway, you take an alternative route, but now those alternative routes, which are limited, cause traffic in other parts of the town...
Now, lets introduce a semi truck that says, HEY! I need to go to the same destination as all the other traffic, but I wanna be in the right lane and I have to take up two lanes to fit my truck to drive. Now imagine you get approval to do it, but when told to maintain separation from the other cars around your vehicle, you say NO.
What do you think that's gonna do to traffic movement?
@@erauprcwa I get it, but that's literally what we get paid to do. Find a gap, make a plan, provide a service. What happens when it's OVC010? And it's not like there aren't other ways of working scenarios like this, look at EGLL or OMDB. I know staffing sucks for you guys but I think blaming an international heavy for doing international heavy things takes us nowhere.
@@seth_alapod If it's OVC at 010, then center and approach control changes the flow of traffic. Obviously. However that wasn't the case during this video's scenario. Just because it's an intl heavy doesn't change basic flying and operational requirements of a given airport/airspace/country. The pilot refused to maintain traffic separation and they got sequenced away from said traffic.
We're all supposed to see and avoid traffic, no matter the operations and that LH pilot refused.
This is basically a customer service issue. The airline has incurred a massive bill because of poor customer service from the airport. I would love to hear the phone call from the airline to the airport after this - you can be sure they complained.
Quite the other way around. Airports that operate at close to maximum capacity plan their arrivals carefully. An airline that needs "special" treatment must make sure that this is communicated ahead of time, and not when they show up and there's an hour or two worth of incoming aircraft on their way, all planned around visual approaches.
And as to that phone call, it will have been very short. Simply put, Lufthansa management was asleep at the wheel. Quite surprising, but that's all that can be said for it.
@@akiko009 What makes you think it wasn't communicated ahead of time? It's a standard thing that is going to affect a large number of flights from a large number of airlines. I'm sure the airport is well aware of it.
Apparently not@@thomasdalton1508
Not how it works. If every single other airline into SFO can do it, Lufthansa can do it too with the most advanced airliner in the world.
Delta does it with 30 year-old 757s, Lufthansa can do it with a shiny new A350 just like everyone else.
@@rfrags2 Of course they can do it. They choose not to because they don't think it is safe. Lots of other airlines have the same policy. I'm sure they don't keep those policies a secret from ATC.
Seems a bit lazy on the controller’s part.
Part lazy, part retaliatory. Neither good
Only someone who doesnt understand how SFO works would say that
yeah, sure seems they just didn't want to deal with him so they kept stalling until he had to divert. thats crazy, possibly creating an emergency by lying to the pilot about estimated hold times.
Saying you refuse to use your eyes seems lazy
@@winitforal he’s claiming it’s his companies policy, not his personal policy
Lufthansa is right in this situation. He asked for an estimate, and ATC couldn’t even answer him. Too bad they had to divert because of it though
They did give an answer... They gave an estimate time and the pilot reported four minutes past that time, they then updated it to 15 minutes. The pilot had to divert at that time.
ATC gave the pilot the estimate and he didn't like it. That's life bro.
@@2Phast4RocketThey gave a wrong estimate and then added more than double. Terrible controllers
@@jazzi_0453 welcome to aviation. You wanna hear about 'hold for release' and EDCT times? (fly airplanes before you talk about "terrible controllers")
@@2Phast4Rocket The ATC kept moving the goals posts. Annoying on the ground, a disaster in the making the air. He can't exactly pull over for more fuel, which they are burning by sending him further and further from the airport for their fun circles. He was complying with the FAA and his airline, SFO ATC made that impossible. That's life bro.
As a controller in Europe: this leaves me completely speechless. It is embarrassing and unprofessional in many ways! Pilot needs an ILS? Create a gap for him to fit in. It will NOT disrupt your traffic flow for the rest of your shift. And it will surely not produce a ton of delay for “everyone behind the DLH” like stated in the comments several times. Instead the controller chose to delay the DLH flight to the extend where a fuel emergency was becoming more and more likely. Telling the crew a correctly calculated amount of delay to be expected instead of poorly guessing it, would have made everyone’s choices available much more clear and the sky safer.
You have different rules bud
At the same time I do accept other rules exist for ATC around the world, ATC at SFO SHOULD accept and acknowledge other rules exist for airlines from other areas of the world and not insist on „everyone follows the OUR staged rules @ SFO“. I totally do agree there’s not one simpel rule set for all ATCOS around the world. But at the same time there’s not such thing like delaying one aircraft that has „special needs“ to the extend displayed here.
It’s your job as an ATC to accommodate everyone in your airspace to the least AVERAGE delay possible. And ATC SFO clearly failed on that one here. Don’t get me wrong but I still think that’s a very poor performance on ATC‘s side
In what ways does holding and divert make any part of this operation safer than just getting him spaced into an ILS??
you never flown into SFO, its a busy airport
@@lethalphoenixA "busy airport" should be able to offer an ILS approach, especially at night. Clown airport in my book
@@jazzi_0453 for sure sounds that way on coms.
How much notice did they have? The airplane diverted after holding for 30 minutes, so Lufthansa didn’t give them much time to find a gap
SFO ain't that busy anymore, check the numbers, it's just not @@lethalphoenix
Man, as professional communication between controllers and pilots can be, these controllers seemed dangerous.
Not dangerous, just jerks. They knew Lufthansa wouldn't run an airplane out of fuel
@@N1120A idk purposefully stalling them until they have to divert could surely be dangerous. what if they ran into other issues during the divert? SFO wasted 30 min of their fuel because they didn't want to do their job.
Put yourself in the shoes of the controller. You have a pair of airplanes landing on the 28s every single minute. You somehow need to build a 3 minute gap into a stream of aircraft that is 100+ miles long. What do you do? @@ryancrazy1
Dangerous??? What's your reasoning?
@@ryancrazy1Thats an assumption. Purposefully vectoring them until they could get space in the flow to vector them in with the separation necessary to accept a no-visual flight is more likely.
Root cause: This was NOT Lufthansa's first fight into SFO at night and NOT the first time the SFO ATC knew of their needs. Also, it would have been good for Lufthansa, in advance of arrival at SFO, to re-advise them of their company reg's. Seems like the controller had an attitude and punished the Lufthansa flight to monkey around on that goofy pattern for so long using his power and control to stress out the Lufthansa crew. A definite investigation is needed here and those causing these controllable actions that went awry need to own up and answer to the consequences.
Agreed - this was handled poorly from both sides IMO.
Nobody here wanted to put people on "goofy patterns" solely to "stress out the Krauts". You watch too many movies. SFO is very very very very very busy airspace he had 49 other people to worry about. There were planes in holding patterns waiting for an approach slot.
@@ghostrider-be9ek Uh, both sides? What did company and/or pilot do wrong here?
@@OfficeLinebacker a) pilot swore on air, b) pilot should have known well in advance that visual approaches were in use, delay vectors likely; it should have not come as a surprise to them
@@ghostrider-be9ek I'm going to give him a pass on point number one because he's European.
These US controllers need to do an internship at LHR or AMS or FRA. Always friendly, super efficient, chill and almost minute precise about delays.
Seems insane that requesting an instrument approach at a major commercial, international airport is enough to cause an aircraft to divert..? Doesn’t make sense to me whatsoever.
After all the SFO incidents lately there is clearly a systemic issue that needs to be addressed either with training or personnel changes and attitude before there is a casualty incident. It seems like SFO is clearly on the path to one right now though.
It's all the lefties not knowing how to control their emotions. They are just big babies.
I kinda wish you didn't trim out the other aircraft on the radar (trimming radio comms is fine) so we could have seen what the overall traffic situation was like.
Shit kicking busy. The controller had a hole built for a visual, the pilot didn’t want it and the pilot delayed. It’s what happens if you don’t tell ATC ahead of time of your restrictions
@@OutdoorSnail i suggest you read your comment...
This would be an evening arrival, so both landing runways and both takeoff runways would be very busy. Then there's two more international airports in the immediate area, and twenty seven (27) airports in what is considered the Bay Area. Fourteen of those are uncontrolled. I stood overlooking Oakland Airport one evening and counted 34 aircraft at low level in sight. We were in line with the departure 1s at SFO and could see aircraft landing at SJC too. But there are many controllers, each only responsible for part of the mess. It wasn't even foggy. This controller does not get my sympathy.
@@OutdoorSnailit’s a company policy, this is something the FAA briefs controllers on, this is complete failure of the atc system for this pilot. Shameful display of ego and arrogance over being helpful and professional.
The traffic situation was atrocious there were planes in holding patterns sequencing in for approach.
I was a controller 37 years at LAX and NY. The level of service now is interesting to say the least. Any decent controller could have run a staggered approach for LH and have marginal affect on his final. Just tells me the final controller only has 1 tool in his bag...it's embarrassing to hear and see!!!
The controller was a dick. I seriously doubt they would've done this to an American carrier.
That’s one rude ATC! ☹️
It's San Francisco. Not much else to be expected.
@@Astro95Media actually, that controller was in Sacramento
A US carrier wouldn't have the limitation, so the situation wouldn't come up
Oh please, so now you're accusing ATC of being racist or xenophobic? The issue was their company wouldn't allow them to do what ATC was requesting. ATC didn't make their company's rules.
„Conversation is over“. lol. Didn’t know my mom works at SFO.
A complicating factor at SFO is that the parallel runway is too close for normal current rules, you couldn't build it that way now. And then there's the departing traffic crossing your landing runway. I didn't like the attitude of the controller, sounded like when he was given something that didn't fit he decided to punish them for being difficult. Then when the complained that he wasn't making any attempt to get them in he doubled down by forcing them to divert. I wonder if Lufthansa will complain officially for the thousands that cost them. He has to have burned several tons holding, and then probably as much again for the reposition flight. Jet-A is not far off $2,000 per ton. So this was more than $10,000 in bad service.
thats an incredibly low estimate. not only do you have the fuel cost, you have 400 passengers at the wrong airport probably missing connecting flights.
It's a busy airspace and as shown in the video, the Lufthansa airplane was stepping on other traffic just to have a conversation on a busy radio frequency.
They were given an EFC time. Lufthansa called them four minutes after the EFC time. The controller asked two questions; what's your alternate and do you need to divert?
The Lufthansa airplane wouldn't give an answer but an explanation of their current situation. The controller told them, NOT ON FREQUENCY! Told them it would be another 10-15 minutes before they could potentially get in.
Lufthansa didn't inform ATC until the last minute of their requirements for an ILS approach. Lufthansa put themselves in that situation and had ALL of the available information of what kind of approach they would've been given well within an hour of landing and decided not to request the visual until they were close to the last fix on the arrival into SFO, which was SFO airport at 11,000ft.
The situation could've been avoided if the Lufthansa crew was proactive in telling ATC just as they started the arrival of their needs and control could've fit them in better.
@@erauprcwaIt's possible that they were told "expect 28R" and assumed that it meant ILS. I'm sure they'll go to the tapes and figure it out
@@erauprcwa They don't need to tell them they need an ILS. SFO is an international airport that gets regular flights from outside North America.
You don't get special treatment and payment for having stricter rules than everyone else.
This controller reminds me of someone I used to work with.... My blood pressure rose on behalf of the Lufthansa crew
They really couldn't vector him on the ILS with standard separation? Isn't that your job ATC? SEPARATION...
This is the standard procedure across Europe and many other parts of the world too. US controllers have a very strange way of working to say the least.
SFO was operating with 28L/28R arrivals on visual, apparently ILS was down. The two runways only have something like 750' of lateral separation, so without ILS you be expecting very high precision and assuming the SOIA warning breakout system was also down, it would be foolhardy.
@@kibashisiyoto6771surely, one of the ILSs was operational, right? And, Lufty said early on he needed and instrument approach, which is not unusual at all at bigger airports. Norcal could have spaced them in correctly and no-one would have set their pants on fire. Overall, it’s just poor ATC planning.
It's not that the ILS was out, it's that for Lufthansa to land, it would require another 3 aircraft to be delayed to fit them into the sequence since you can't land at SFO side-by-side without applying pilot-applied visual separation, which is a standard practice at SFO, including at night. This was ATC's way of sticking it to the company procedures of Lufthansa since it is not aligned with the procedures of literally every other company that goes in and out of SFO. If they can't do what is standard for that airport, well, yeah, get delayed until you are able to fit in, or divert. Pilots and the company can bitch all they want
Does NOT sound like a German accent.
I'd be really interested to hear from the controllers perspective here because this does not make sense. Couldn't an aircraft on the parallel maintain visual with Lufthansa? Couldn't they have turned them on at different altitudes and used a final monitor controller for a few minutes? At the very least, they could have let them go in and just leave a 1 aircraft gap on the parallel for him, I'm not sure what the tracon has going on, but from an outside perspective it seems egregiously unnecessary.
Agreed! Who knows, maybe the ILS was down for maintenance. The lack of communications and leaving the Pilot hanging was unprofessional. I'd be upset too.
@@tamhiker1yes, it’s safe. If you’re on a staggered approach, the slightly aft guy can see the other, not the other way around. Visual flight rules means at least one of the two has visibility of the other.
@@tamhiker1 It sounds unsafe but if you really think about it, unless they are directly parallel with each other, there's only one plane that has visual of the other. Since the side to side visibility from the cockpit is fairly limited compared to in the cabin.
davidjimenez6803 - "Couldn't an aircraft on the parallel maintain visual with Lufthansa?" - If the other plane needs to maintain visual contact with the LH, then the LH crew needs to maintain visual contact as well, which is prohibited by the company (and something I have never seen in my life!)
See my comment in the thread.
They're messing with him, crew, passengers, and airplane because he wouldn't break the rules.
Lol no
Why wouldn't you vector others around or slow them down, so you can get him in? Why is setting up an ILS that much more difficult?
Genuinely curious about this also. I certainly hope this wasn’t done in spite. That would not be okay at all for soooo many reasons.
Because the separation minima are higher for instrument approaches than for Visuals. I'm assuming ATC was reluctant to get their nicely arranged queue of arrivals out of sequence (consideirng note in video that there was a 100nm stream of arrivals).
@@TheVibesProject They’re experts. They probably could have slowed the next few aircraft behind them down slightly to open up a small bit of space so they could ensure that IP minima. But that would have taken extra work.
@@TheVibesProject i dont see how issuing visual app would help. I would go to min app speed as soon as I recieve visual app clearance which would back up everyone even more
Once aircraft confirm the traffic around them insight, it's up to the aircraft to maintain separation and not ATC, therefore there are no minimum separation requirements. On an ILS approach, atc need to maintain at least 2.5 nm between aircraft on final
The most maddening part of this whole think is the way the controller pronounced Quebec.
I would say overall, the controller made this situation worse by his confrontational attitude , and being unhelpful. As for his pronunciation of Quebec, he is exactly correct. There are certain words and numbers in the International Phonetic Alphabet that many/ most people don't adhere to as published. Examples are 9=niner, 5= fife, 3= tree, 4=fo-wer,
I thought the same thing.
There's a lot of weird annunciations that very few people follow... It's all in the 7110.65
Maybe the controller is from Quebec or knows Quebecois and how the city is pronounced in French…
@amb865 this is the US of A. Get that foreign shit outta here
Hopefully Juan can fill us in on the why as he might have insight.
Excellent post!
ok, I understand that's not how the runway approaches are controlled at the moment, but you give a guy "hold for 10m" and then 14m later you still don't know when you will be sequencing him in. You delay additional comms and ask what his intentions are? You haven't given him enough information to make a decision and you're too cowardly (as a unit of approach controllers) to say "I can't fit you in, divert to Oakland" because, apparently, you just don't want to be labeled as the cause of a divert. KSFO is in WAY too many of these videos and nation-wide reports
This is due to the controller's arrogance, pride, and lack of professionalism. Your words make 100 percent sense. If I'm the pilot in command, I'll declare low-fuel land in SFO,
However, the air traffic controller is unaware of the amount of exhaustion, fatigue, and suffering that passengers will experience due to stress, in addition to those who will miss connecting flights to other destinations
You obviously do not fly into busy airspace with low ceilings like SFO. You obviously play too much flight sim and that got to your head.
@@gotacallfromvishal I think my flying hours that I have only in a wide body airplanes flying all over the world are more than your brain cells, which would make you think I’m playing on a simulator. that’s the only comment I can say.
@@user-zw4xu2lg5v if anything you said was true you would understand the bigger picture in sfo and you'd realize that the lufthansa plane in this video is not the only flying machine they have to take into consideration here.
@@gotacallfromvishalFunny, cause if you understood the bigger picture, you'd quickly realise it's better for the universe to pull one a/c out of the sequence and delay it by 10 minutes iso. forcing another to wholly divert and lose hours and tons of fuel.
These SFO controllers been on something all year! What’s going on?
Normally folks are too hard on US controllers for whatever reason, but this was just abject stupidity. They vector visuals onto the ILS or RNAV final anyway.
It wasn't a matter of vectoring them on to the ILS, it's about the spacing and liability. When an aircraft accepts a visual approach, the pilots accept responsibility for maintaining visual separation and aircraft can be much closer together. The Lufthansa refusing to accept that liability keeps ATC in charge, and they need the aircraft behind to give much more spacing than they have room for
@@spelldaddy5386Thanks..
@@spelldaddy5386 that's not exactly why. Sure, visual separation can lessen the separation burden, but that separation isnt taking place until on final, or on the turn to final. Most terminal separation isn't different. Also, there's simply no situation where they need half an hour to find the very minimal extra spacing for an ILS - they were just punishing Lufthansa
Maybe the ILS was down and it would take some time to get it up? We don't know! The guy could have been more professional and provided more of a detailed explanation to the pilot. This guy, most likely, is winding down a very long flight and now is being vectored all over the place without a seemingly valid explanation. His crew is tired, give them a vector to an ILS! Don't tell me they couldn't find spacing for a 30 minute period. Egos make horrible controllers!
@@spelldaddy5386this seems right to me, but it feels unsafe to hand off separation liability to pilots because you want to keep a tight sequence at night, kinda seems to me like what ATC is made for.
These controllers were being d*cks, they could’ve easily sequenced him in but they didn’t want to and forcing them to have to divert. These controllers are dangerous and should not be working there playing with people’s lives in the air to prove a point like this is a joke
Alright lets hear how you would have sequenced them.
@mike_jean And what equipment do you fly and for which 121 carrier?
@@DerekJohnson-us7vy looks like we have some controllers in the comments lol first off, I would never comment my airline on TH-cam to a bunch of strangers. That’s just stupid and reckless. Secondly, I bet if they would have declared an emergency then they would have found that spacing they so called couldn’t find. Stop being obtuse. You clearly know these controllers were being retaliatory and lazy. Use common sense, you are not fooling anyone and if you operate like the controllers in that video then please do everyone a favor and quit your job before you get people hurt. Do better.
@@aviationenjoyer757 ^
How would you have sequenced the planes@@Mike_Jean
I can say from my own experiance flying with German pilots, they are built different. The "we will have to declare a fuel emergency and that will really f*ck up your sequence" line was right in keeping with what I know about those guys, they speak their mind and it's a good quality to have especially in the face of a power tripping controller. The controller was very unprofessional, "this conversation is over" is not an appropriate response to an aircraft requesting how long they will be delayed with interest to their fuel quantity.
To be clear: I have great respect for air traffic controllers, they are extremely important to us as pilots and we could not do what we do without them, but this kind of behavior on their part (while rare) is not a good thing.
If i was the captain on this flight i wouldve filed a report! You CAN accept a visual, you don't have to! And it makes perfect sense to do an ILS approach at night time!
Accepting VFR means PIC accepts responsibility for separation.
So if too close- then ATC sats go around again, causes even more problems.
If you don't accept the procedures taking place at the time and the airspace is so congested that ATC can do nothing about it to accommodate you, then you divert to wherever you fit your SOP.
@marcfair2163 And... What equipment do you fly and for which 121 carrier?
@@DerekJohnson-us7vy The US is not the only country.
Or, you tell them you’re taking the visual but you fly the ILS, assuming it’s switched on and identing. It’s obviously Cat 1 conditions, so just use the ILS to guide your “visual” approach. Maintaining visual separation from other aircraft at night is nigh on impossible. You can’t possibly judge distance using their nav lights. Sure, you’ll most likely have them on your traffic display, but that hardly counts as visual separation.
That SFO allows visual approaches at night is the weird thing. That said, the controller could have behaved better and more professionally. To leave an airliner out there and not even make contact (presumably) after the hold time limit passed is unacceptable. If the LH pilot had not contacted tower he probably would have been left in a hold until he had to declare a fuel emergency. That controller needs some help, for sure.
Help? I’d say that ATC person needs to be suspended.
@@serverlog No doubt about it, but I meant mental help, because no controller in their right mind would let this happen.
One would think that if they're unable to do ILS approaches, they should at least inform the pilots why that is, instead of shutting down conversation
That wasn't the time for that conversation. That conversation can be had over the phone after the plane lands. All ATC needed to know at that point was whether or not they were going to divert and all the pilots needed from ATC was an estimate of how much longer they might have to delay if they opted to stay. That's why ATC shut _that_ conversation down at that point.
@@MikeDCWeldso what you're saying is they can't discuss how to land the plane in what approach until after they land....right buddy
It's kind of obvious why and anyone who's been to SFO knows exactly why also. The radio is NOT the place, especially in the Bay Area to have long drawn out conversations.
@@bubbaman12289 They already said they can't do a visual and have to do an ILS. They refused to maintain visual separation from arriving traffic and as such needed to be vectored with a delay. They were asked of their intentions to divert and they didn't give an answer. The controller didn't ask for an explanation, they asked if they needed to divert to OAK or not? Again, the pilot didn't answer... Yes, the controller shut it down.
@@bubbaman12289 the pilots can certainly discuss it amongst themselves and with their company on a different frequency. They can't have a long, drawn out conversation with ATC on the same frequency as all the other traffic, especially when the topic isn't relevant. The pilots had been informed of what approaches were available and had claimed that they were unable to accept them and needed a different approach that would require a delay. They then indicated that they were nearing minimum fuel. The only things relevant was what they were intending to do and the information the pilots needed to make that decision.
Hahaha they sure showed him who's boss and then some! Only bad thing is that there was a plane full of hundreds of innocent paying passengers who's lives were being put at risk due to childish behavior. I'm not having this conversation, please, That's what teenage girls say,
@johnbrennan2723 No one's life was at risk. Why are you spouting this nonsense?
With the amount of international airlines and prelevance of visual approches at night into SFO, surprised this hasnt happened before
Because most do the visual backed up with the ILS... See and avoid traffic is a standard and one should ALWAYS be backing up any approach, even a visual approach with an instrument approach.
How could you pinalize a pilot (in a sense - by delaying them) when they are going by the book and asking for what is fair and square ?
I haven’t flown into SFO before but those controllers seem horrendous. Just listening to different interactions on this channel make me realize how fortunate I am to be flying east of the Mississippi.
If you fly into SFO as a pilot, you'd understand the arrival and procedures. I'd have to say while it's unfortunate, the pilots caused more problems than they helped. The arrival they were on brings them directly over the SFO airport around 11,000 ft. At that point, approach control will vector the airplane onto the visual approach and land the airplane, so long as the airplane can maintain visual separation of the parallel traffic in sight.
An hour before arrival, airplanes will receive the current weather for the given airport, the ATIS, and that ATIS will tell them what type of approach to expect.
So an hour before they arrived, the crew saw visual approaches runways 28L/R and decided to wait until the very last minute to inform ATC that they needed an ILS. This could've been avoided had they informed ATC well in advance.
@@FitmanFatty It didn't. Looking at the FlightAware track, at the time they were over SFO, ATIS D reported that the charted visual flight procedures were in use for runway 28L and 28R. Earlier ATIS reports C, B, and A all reported the same, so the ILS wasn't being used at all.
Since the flight crews are recorded for professionalism at all times, so should the ATC. Anything said off mic should also be recorded
458 is AN IFR AIRCRAFT and under ZERO responsibility to accept a VFR Clearance….none..zero…It’s (NORCAL)SFO ATC’s job to sequence traffic….as a 30+ year 121 guy ..I’m appalled….THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE.
The FAA should start an inquiry…..immediately. 100% unprofessional and hazardous. I’ve seen worse at KSFO.
🤓☝️
I was watching this when it happened a few weeks ago. There was a huge arrival wave and everyone was diverted from the SERFR4, DYMAD5 and BDEGA3 (main arrival STARs) into SFO. There were no parallels allowed for some reason. Everyone was spaced out, and they had aircraft holding from 12,000-20,000ft. Lufthansa was not the only one holding for arrival. Multiple inbounds from Hawaii were also holding over the water. A WestJet aircraft also diverted to Sacramento due to having to hold on the BDEGA3 arrival for multiple minutes. UAL300 was holding over the water for almost 15 minutes.
There’s some more information we don’t have here. There must be a rule NorCal has regarding visibility, because they don’t take everyone off the arrivals unless it’s visibility or an issue at the nearby airports. Also, there was a huge system of fog coming over the Bay Area at a couple thousand feet, so maybe there was visibility rules NorCal had to follow? Again, they don’t do this out of spite. I think there’s more we don’t see here that the controllers know. I’ve talked to the initial and final approach controller many times over my flying in the Bay Area and they are usually more than helpful to me. I don’t think this was a controller issue. We can critique the situation all we want, but the only ones who know what really happened were the controllers. There’s more to the story that we can’t see.
Agreed! On the other hand, if there were fog and visibility issues as you offer, they should have been using ILS approaches anyway.
I'm open to more information. I don't think they did so out of spite, but there is a level of competence that is in question at SFO/NORCAL.
Something I've seen from several controllers lately is that they have a stream of planes inbound and spaced out. Rather than disrupt that stream in any way (because it's conveniently already lined up), they ask a plane that isn't part of their plan to hold until they can sequence them in. This is incorrect procedure. The plane ready for the approach first should be given the approach first and the controller should be flexible enough to manage the incoming traffic.
Let's say I have 20 planes lined up WAY out over the Pacific in exactly 3 minute intervals and that stream is approaching my airspace. As a controller, that's an EASY day: same thing for 20 consecutive aircraft for an hour.
Now, add 1 unexpected plane/delay into the mix. Rather than add a turn to the stream of 20 planes inbound to create space/a delay to slip Luftansa in, I'll just have Luftansa circle until they have to divert. Ah...easy...
Now, is that what happened? I don't know. It's what I fear, but I'm open to more information.
"Was there fog?" is the exact opposite of what you'd expect. You wouldn't be mandating visual approaches if visibility is a factor.
That may have all happened but for the controllers to take this my way or the highway stand with 300+ people in the back in absolutely ridiculous. No explanation or reasoning can excuse that.
But there would also be an expectation that airlines wouldn't be caught completely off guard if there are fog issues in san francisco. This wouldn't be a one-off kind of thing. An airline wouldn't have policies for planes going to a major airport that make it so you can't land at that airport in not-uncommon weather situations.
@@zachansen8293 They weren’t caught off guard by the weather, they had a alternate of Oakland. They were caught guard by controllers making them hold because a company policy inconvenience them.
The impression given is that it 'was just too difficult' for the controllers to do their job, almost to the point where it appeared they intentionally let the a/c fuel divert because it was too inconvenient.
Perhaps they were just practicing being obstructive for a new job as receptionist at a doctor's office.
Honest question, what's your job/profession?
Imagine if I came in and messed up the flow that you had with your job, when it wasn't necessary. Then argued with you about it, causing a potential hazard that you have to stop.
You tell me you can accommodate me, but you need me to do one thing... a thing that I should be doing anyway no matter the situation, but I refuse. Then I call you lazy, arrogant, incompetent, and obstructive, for not bowing to my demands when I tell you.
@@erauprcwa Retired military air traffic controller with a few hundred hours pilot experience.
What's yours?
@@ma9x795 Airline pilot with 20 years experience, thousands of hours and ex-military.
@@erauprcwaSo you should know exactly what I meant by my comment then.
@@ma9x795 Did you understand mine?
I can totally understand the pilot's frustration, poor communication by the controller then he straight up cut them off.
Surely this isn’t the 1st time LH has come in here at night? And surely they know there’s a high possibility of a visual? However, feels like they’ve been punished here which resulted in a divert. I’d be sooo pissed as a passenger after a near 13 hour flight.
flight was supposed to come in around 6pm while there was some daylight but there was a two hour delay.
@@Tyleraviator99This flight is scheduled to arrive at 18:45 every day. That's after dark.
This flight arrives after dark every evening and I'm sure it doesn't divert to Oakland every day. This was purely one controller throwing his weight around and refusing to do his job. Clearly every other controller that works that shift manages it fine.
@@thomasdalton1508 that wasn’t after dark when this occurred.
@@Tyleraviator99 When did this occur? There is no date in the video.
I’m 100% with the pilot on this one.
Why do lots of US controller's have an arrogance problem? This was a simple request that was completely blown out of proportion.
Theyn only have repercussions if they cause a mid-air.
Other than that, they can be petty dictators.
@@fhuber7507 And which equipment do you fly and for which 121 carrier?
@@DerekJohnson-us7vy you sound like a broken record.
What equipment do you fly and for which 121 carrier/what ATC facility do you work at?@@midgetwidget
This is a cultural problem.
I was really hoping he'd declare a fuel emergency, just to screw with ATC, but understand why he didn't. Pilot acted in a professional manner, ATC seemed to act spiteful.
Kudos to the pilots for staying calm and just „playing along“. Although it probably busted up a lot in their schedule…
Very strange Lufthansa has been flying into SFO for eons as far as I know. Surely ATC would know about this company restriction right? If the 28 RL ILSs were down should that not be in a NOTAM/ATIS? I wonder if ATC was just trying to cram as many arrivals into as short a period of time as possible. The controller sure sounded like he didn’t have time to discuss anything with anybody. I’ve heard plenty of non-US ATCs on plane spotting streams from other countries. I have to say I’m often not particularly impressed with the attitude of US controllers. Too often they, e.g., seem to be daring crews who don’t have English as their first language to understand what they’re saying.
My guess is that most of european compagnies operate just the same and forbid visual night approaches. They are known to be dangerous so let's imagine after a 12 hours flight ?
It's up to the pilots to request the approach.
What in the world is going on at SFO?!? There have been a lot of these conflicts lately.
Leftists are taking over they cause problems everywhere
I hope @blancolirio gives a detailed explanation of this. The pilot appeared to have no choice???
Interesting video. Thanks for sharing.
That controller was an a$$..
The controller sounds like he owns the airport.
"I'm running out of fuel" - Pilot
"This conversation is over" - ATC
And we wonder why planes still crash...
If hes running out of fuel, he needs to declare min fuel or an emergency. Its not ATCs job to hold his hand. We are taught this in flight training. ATC is busy. They arent in our cockpit. They dont know what the situation entails unless we say MAYDAY, emergency, or min fuel (which means something entirely different and is not an emergency btw).
@@xxhockeymaster03xx- that’s an absurd take. Lufthansa was saying fuel is approaching a problem, and he needs to know how much longer the delay will be as the last estimate was incorrect. ATC failed to provide him with a further estimate, and then treated him like garbage when he asked for the most basic information.
seems something airforceproud95 would say in his videos but very bad from SFO ATC very bad
@@xxhockeymaster03xx well he did ask and was told 10 minutes. Then 4 minutes after 10 minutes had gone by he asked again and was told the conversation was over. Check your ego at the door when you clock in.
@@skycaptain3344 to ATC, “we are approaching a problem, fuel wise” means absolutely nothing. At least here in the USA.
The heart of this is SFO incident is an aviation cultural and economic divide between North American and the rest of the world. US and Canadian airlines require significantly more experience at the time of being hired by an airline. This experience level used to be routine airline hiring policy but the FAA now mandates the ATP/1500 hour rule. To get to this required level, American and Canadian civilian pilots usually become flight instructors and other jobs with a heavy emphasis on visual flying. Military pilots also do a lot of visual approaches and maneuvers during their training exercises. Visual approaches are second nature to almost all pilots in the US and Canada.
In Europe as well as much of the world, general aviation is expensive and heavily taxed. Airlines generally put new pilots through a training program and after a few hundred hours of experience, they go to the right seat of an Airbus or Boeing. Much of the training is done under IFR rules and tailored to the airline pilot career. They do not get as much experience doing visuals than their North American counterparts. When you do something infrequently and without much prior experience, it becomes a safety hazard.
For airports in FAA land, visual approaches significantly increase the amount of traffic an airport can accept. This is not some secret information. The public ATC OIS page has each major airport acceptance rate published based on runways in use and weather conditions. The vast majority of traffic volume at American airports are from domestic carriers with pilots that have lots of experience in these approaches. It makes sense to use visuals as delays would be significantly worse if everyone flew based on IFR acceptance rates. Why takes delays when you dont have to.
This particularly SFO case seems to be a case of miscommunication by all parties involved. Both on Lufthansa and ATC. This flight was operating late. The regular schedule of this flight is likely coordinated with an agreement with Lufthansa and FAA ATC to build the separation for the ILS approach during the arrival time. It appears that neither Lufthansa management nor ATC management notified each other as well as the pilots and controllers working this flight that this flight would need the ILS seperation built in later than normal due to the delay. The controllers ended up surprised by a flight that normally is not there at that time and suddenly is unable to do what everyone can do which creates a huge problem during a busy arrival push. The pilots had no idea that after a delay they were now arriving in a heavy traffic volume time frame. The pilots and Lufthansa operations should have added more fuel before leaving Europe to account for the delayed arrival time and FAA ATC notiified that they would be arriving late and to inform LH if this would be a problem. When flights are delayed, Airlines can and do extend the delay to work with ATC and local airports so the flight arrives at a time that is better for all involved. Usually when its known in advance and well communicated, these problems can be solved well in advance and ATC can plan their arrival spacing to accomodate the late flight.
This is an incident that is a result of winging it. This happens too often in the airline industry. When you do things without doing the proper planning and communication, these things are going to happen. When ATC informed the pilot of the delay for the ILS, the pilot said he didnt care. What he should have done is ask ATC how long the delay was going to be and if too long inform ATC how long he can hold. ATC has no way of knowing how much fuel each airline carries on flight as each airline and each pilot can plan whatever extra fuel they want within legal limits. You can take a lot of fuel or the bare minimum legal. As soon as being informed of the delay, thats when you communicate your situation. You do not wait until you are low on fuel to threaten emergencies and then do your fuel calculations.
This being said, ATC could have made space in the pattern and worked this heavy in a lot quicker than they did. The heavy from Europe should have been given priority over domestic flights and worked in.
Again, proper management and coordination between airline and ATC managers would have prevented this long before it occurred. Everyone being on the same page and proactive in solving potential problems is extremely important.
I think you have a great explanation here of the different expectations and experiences American pilots have from the rest of the world. Very informative. Especially the part about arrivals rates for visual / instrument approaches. Thanks for taking the time to type this out. Out of all of this I have one question..
You said “This being said, ATC could have made space in the pattern and worked this heavy in a lot quicker than they did.”
I’m curious how you would expect them to accomplish that? There are planes from all directions being fed 5 miles apart in a line from LA, SLC, and PDX. Of course there are gaps in some lines at different intervals. But for the most part, (and with knowledge of this particular scenario) it was extremely busy and consistent from all directions. How do the controllers handle this to get in this special request quicker than what happened?
It's not as simple as just accepting an ILS especially given the massive variations in quality of ATC in the US at the moment. Look at the recent Fed Ex and Sky West near miss as well as Delta and (I think?) American. As an Aussie pilot with an expat heavy airline, we're really on our toes in US airspace. The E3 Visa rush wasn't the band-aid fix it was supposed to be either. The kids from the sausage factories jumped to regional jets from instructing in Diamonds in the circuit they learned and then got butt rushed to mainline. Couple that with a very stretched ATC work force and it's like having to drive through the guts of Bangkok at 5pm on a Friday afternoon.
You should always be on your toes when flying. Kind of dumb remark is that?
@@JediOfTheRepublic Dumb? Don't have to like it but that's my informed professional opinion. If it makes you less upset how about I rephrase it as - currently foreign pilots are MORE on their toes in the US given the recent FAA failures and the lack of experience of most pilots and the low standard of flight training compared to other countries.
First, I can't help but picture Arnold Schwarzenegger at the controls. It's killing me. Lol
Second, I don't understand why ATC couldn't arrange for the ILS approach as requested, or if unavailable, maybe just give the flight crew a reason as to why- and they could've diverted earlier and save a bunch of time and fuel. I think I'm missing some info.
The commercial aviation situation in this country is degrading swiftly, and the FAA and Transportation Dept. are standing idly by and letting it fall apart. Yesterday a friend was on a SWA flight that was delayed 1 1/2 hours because they had no ground crew to load the plane. They arrived late at their scheduled destination and had to wait another 45 minutes because they had no available gates due to their late arrival. This is not a one off. It’s becoming the standard when flying in this country. I avoid flying now by extending my drive time from 6 hours to eight hours. If I can get somewhere in 8 hours by car, I drive. I’m not afraid to fly. I used to enjoy it, but the frustration with these conditions is worth not taking the chance unless there are time constraints.
The problem is the same as many other industries. Lack of staff. No one wants to do these jobs anymore. Everyone seems to want to be a TikTok star.
If there is a lack of staff then they need to hire more even if it means you pay them 200k a year. Companies can’t have it both ways. If there is a surplus of workers they are quick to fire or lay people off, but if there is a shortage they are reluctant to push wages up to where people will actually take the jobs
Look if you have an issue with your airline go complain to the FAA or Bill Maher about it we don't care that your SWA flight was delayed an hour because of no ramp crew.
Look at the moron in charge of transportation atm. I'm not surprised at all.
We have the same problem in the EU, no worries we feel you.
I fully understand the frustration of the LH pilot. Sucks for the ATC but come on, there has to be a way that isn't "i'm not having this conversation"
He was getting cursed at by the pilot. I’m not surprised he shut down the pilot since he blocked Skywest when when he said he was going to F up the sequence. It would be good to hear more of the dialog to see how aggressive the pilot was
@@javidkhan7017 The controller wasn't cursed AT. The pilot basically said "action XYZ is probably going to screw up your sequence". Not as a threat, just as a reminder or let's say as a natural consequence of things. If he really used the F word (pretty garbled transmission tbh) it's only because it's such a common expression we hear and read from US sources all the time that it has become the norm for many Europeans speaking English as a second language. Used in this particular sentence it's not even on the same level as cr*p or sh*t and is definately not regarded as THE ultimate no-no word in Europe. At least not when talking casually. So in this slightly stressful and unexpected situation it was most likely the first thing that came to his mind, instead of saying for example "screw up..., disrupt..., break...your sequence". In summary, it was just a cultural misunderstanding. He wasn't being intentionally disrespectful. Just not a native speaker.
@@javidkhan7017liar! Pilot did not CURSE at the ATC. Pilot used an expletive while making a prediction about how his request would impact the sequencing.
@@rayreid1589 So a 'professional' pilot made an expletive on the radio, while stepping on other pilots trying to get instructions during critical phases of their flight?
When the only answer they were to give was yes or no if they could hold longer and what their alternate airport/intentions are?
@@erauprcwa You are bringing up a different point. One commenter accused the pilot of "cursing". I rebuked the commenter. I did NOT write that the pilot "stepping" on others was ok. (BTE - because of the way the audio was edited, I would not assume the pilot "stepped" on anyone. It is clear the pilot was NOT getting the answers he needed or requested. Your reading comprehension needs work.
so why are the controllers being dicks here? he has a rule he has to follow, shouldn't be difficult so why is this an issue?
San Francisco. 'Nough said.
@@Astro95Media Sacramento
Well, because there shouldn't be any issues squeezing LH in via ILS. And secondly, the Captain onboard has the final decision when it comes to flying, so if LH has a rule that forbids visual approach during night time, then ATC has to accept this and work out a way to squeeze the flight crew in via ILS. It's that simple.
ATC didn't do their job and escalated the situation for the worse.
Would the controllers accommodating LH not cause slight delays for all following traffic? It feels like being devil's advocate, but since they seemed to be very busy (maybe overwhelmed even), perhaps they didn't want to have a single plane that was already late cause any delay for all the other traffic that they were dealing with.
Even if that were the case, I don't think that mindset justifies putting LH in a hold until it's forced to divert.
@@N1120A LH458 is an SFO flight.
I’m *not fully convinced the pilot said “f*ck up your sequence”. It certainly sounds plausible, but I’m really curious what the pilot thinks or claims he said.
At any rate, douchebag controller. This does not seem necessary. Though in the spirit of fairness, I’d be curious to hear ATC’s explanation of the events.
muck /mək/ intransitive verb 😁
@@nw6gmp I agree
He might well have said it. It's used so often now in streamed TV dramas (I think Netflix specifies a quota per hour that must get used) that foreigners might not realise that the word is taboo.
Swear words just don’t sound as bad in a foreign language.
We in Germany use „fuck“ all the time and it doesn’t sound too vulgar to our ears because it is basically gibberish to our brains even though we obviously know what it means, just because we didn’t grow up with the shocked reaction to its use.
But if someone used the German equivalent verb „ficken“ in a german conversation in such a formal setting, Germans would think that this person doesn’t have (self) respect.
This is just a subtle cultural misunderstanding that can easily happen when two people have different native languages.
Even if a German is fluent in English and knows how shocked native English speakers are about the use of such a word, some words just won’t sound as bad to them as their German equivalent.
@@p.s.224 Best comment in this entire post. Thank you for the explanation. It makes perfect sense!
Problem is the approach in use. Runway 28L/R have runway centerlines that are 700ft away from each other. Aircraft are sequenced to land nearly side by side by beginning each airplane on an ILS (LDA on 28R) with approaches that slowly converge. The trailing aircraft reports the lead aircraft in sight and does not pass them on the approach, but will fly close to the other aircraft, while also maintaining electronic guidance towards the runway.
Lufthansa refused to maintain visual separation due to reasons other commenters pointed out. However that doesn't mean he couldn't be the lead aircraft. Alternatively, a normal ILS without any visual separation involved would have required one arrival (lufthansa's) without a second aircraft in pair. This effectively cuts out another aircraft that could have applied with the procedure in use.
However, 30 minute+ delay and causing a diversion, possibly hundreds of missed connections for passengers, seems foolish on the part of the controllers involved. I don't know what the traffic situation was, perhaps it was entirely justified with a constant stream of arrivals. But that doesn't mean you throw your hands up in the air. Get the supervisor and/or TMU involved, and coordinate with the center sectors to make a gap. They have to do this all the time with bad weather and go around or when aircraft break off the approach for being too close anyhow.
Also, curious why he didn’t declare an emergency for low fuel, that would’ve gotten them in right away on the ILS.
Cause he's supposed to go to his alternate first
Maybe the ILS was down for maintenance. We don't know the whole story, but it seems as if the controllers were butthurt and jackin with the guy.
AFAIK you are only allowed to declare a fuel emergency if you have less than the reserve fuel (30 minutes) remaining or if you are expecting to use it.
@@N1120A If they're declaring fuel emergency, but the alternate is farther away. Doesn't make sense to force them to go to alternate.
@@jmk5638 OAK is so close that it would really be an issue of running the plane dry to not have alternate fuel to get there, especially in VMC.
A few misconceptions in this comment section.
1. ILS approaches require further spacing between aircraft than visual. (A bigger bubble between aircraft)
They cannot conduct close parallel approaches as a result which SFO relies very heavily on to keep traffic moving and reduce delays.
2. The controllers are not employed by the airport but the FAA. If you have filed a customer service complaint with the DMV you can expect yours with the FAA to have the same outcome.
3. These controllers are extremely short staffed and over worked while dealing with high traffic volumes. They do not have the luxury of talking this out and wasting valuable air time with multiple targets traveling at miles a minute in close proximity to each other.
Unfortunately the reality is that their SOP does not supersede the capacity at which the airport is operating at. If they cannot comply with the approach procedures in use, they must wait for an opening or divert.
It’s not uncommon for ATC to deny a specific approach request to aircraft while another is in use. Happens all the time.
This is a great comment.
So basically SFO is a dangerous airport which operate outside the recommanded procedures edicted by the various regulators. But we all knew that already anyway.
@@12345fowler not at all.
The only safety issue currently is the system wide ATC staffing shortage.
Maybe reread my post and you might see that this is indeed a traffic volume issue and does not impact safety in any way.
So staffing shortage is an unsolvable problem??? I would have some ideas about that. Greetings from Germany....
@@tobicitas as do I! Simply put. Better pay and quality of life improvements for crew and controllers alike.
As usual people are making snap judgments without all the info. Such is the way of the internet. 🤷♂️
NorCal had a new interpretation of ILS approaches come down several months ago that tied the controllers hands with regards to ILS approaches during visual conditions. Normally during side by operations in visual conditions both aircraft that will be landing 750ft apart must see each other and maintain visual separation. They’ve done this for years on the finals without many issues. Interpretation came down from the FAA that they couldn’t clear an aircraft for an ILS approach and require them to maintain visual separation with the aircraft next to or in front of them. Standard sep is required. long story short this means that the controllers need to build a standard separation hole on final and can’t pair them up on final. When their being fed a 56 rate from Oakland center with the assumption that everyone withh be paired up, making a hole once final can take a bit of time. In this case is was during a relatively busy inbound push during VMC conditions. The atis is advertising charted visual flight procedure. There are only a few (If any now) carriers that are required to shoot an ILS at night regardless of the advertised approaches and flight conditions.
The controllers were issued guidelines that if it’s busy and an aircraft is unable to comply with the approaches advertised on the atis or maintain visual separation that its better to hold them until there is adequate space on final as it’s more unsafe to start vectoring 30/40 different aircraft to build the required hole for the 1 aircraft who’s company has a lame rule. Several companies have updated their policies to either allows visual approaches at night and or fly the ILS but accept a visual approach and visual separation. ATC would do this same thing to any aircraft that couldn’t comply with a visual approach during the inbound rush, it has nothing to do with Lufthansa being foreign. Although the foreign carriers were majority of crews that were unable visual approaches. During IMC conditions ATC is utilizing 7110.308 procedures to stagger aircraft on the ILS 1 mile apart without having to get and maintain visual separation. This has nothing to do with SOIA as they don’t use that anymore.
TLDR: ATC used to be able to set aircraft up for the ILS even in visual conditions and get visual separation with the aircraft beside them.. that rule changed due to interpretations from people who don’t work traffic and now they can’t. These controllers are doing what they’ve been told to do by FAA management.
Visual approach and visual separation are not the same thing !
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap7_section_4.html#2eH230JACK
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap7_section_2.html
"As usual people are making snap judgments without all the info. Such is the way of the internet."
You are totally ignoring the attitude of the ATC. Whatever you wrote is true, but it doesnt permit the ATC to display such poor attitude towards the Crew. People are making judgements based on their attitude, they could have handled it properly by telling the crew what it is, but they got riled up when asked about the delay.
@@masoodjalal1152 ATC doesn’t always have time to explain everything like I did on frequency. There are other aircraft to talk to and things to do. Can you shoot the approach advertised that everyone else is doing yes or no…. Flying another 5 or 50 miles isn’t going to change that answer. The pilot either wants to go to the alternate or to continue to hold until ATC can make a hole without increasing risk to the other users. But they don’t have time to play 20 questions of what if while trying to vector 30 other planes to the final.
Excellent information. Hopefully more people see this. Especially appreciate the reference document.
ATC's job is not to be nice. Their job is to maintain safety. Which they did. @@masoodjalal1152
I am an ATC and i really can't give this one to my colleagues this time.
They practically force the pilot to diverge without giving any explanation for the delay other than been busy which is the case every single day at that hour.
My POV here is just lack of preparation for the schedule busy traffic incoming.
You might like this. There was a jet blue pilot concerned about starlink Thursday night on Washington center. We were at FL340, 50mi northwest of rdu, on 121.92 when we heard it at approximately 0206Z.
Honestly this is pretty par for the course. The controllers and airspace in Norcal are so overworked during peak periods, they're unable to handle *any* requests from arrivals without excessive, and sometimes unoperable delays. This should be yet another HUGE wake-up call (one among many in the past year alone) that our system is under strain, and is being operated beyond the red line in spite of repeated, strong signals of distress.
The facts here are that this aircraft is under IFR, just like everyone else. IFR is designed to be first-come, first-served on purpose. If the arrival stream cannot be re-worked for the additional few miles or minutes of separation that a single aircraft's IFR approach would require during *VFR* conditions, the writing is *on the wall*.
Seeing it's SFO when the fog comes rolling in what happens to all the visuals they have planned for?
They wouldn't issue visual clearances at that point and plan the arrivals from over 100 miles out to do an actual approach.
US pilot here. The controller clearly fscked this up and didn't want to admit it. Most likely they simply forgot that they had the LH flight spinning and instead of just owning it and sequencing them in, decided to push them to divert so they didn't have to publicly admit fault. Also sounds like there was a controller change here. But in any case, there is no way that the controllers didn't know about company policy. There are many LH flights into SFO every day. This should be investigated, but probably won't be.
This seems like a clinic in how to not be an air traffic controller. I don't want my insurance company telling my doctor how to practice medicine and I don't want my ATC to tell my pilot how to fly. Especially since he is following corporate policy and failure would likely result in termination, and the policy is likely based on OTHER problems at SFO and what the FAA has recommended.
Would of loved to hear the LH pilot hold till he declared a fuel emergency and tell the controller he’s on his own vector to intercept the ILS and clear himself to land.
You probably don't really mean it, since it would not be the safest for the passengers. You never know when you might have other complications. Maintaining a fuel reserve was the professional thing to do.
there is no call for this at all, no reason they could not give him an ILS approach, no reason to hold him until he is low fuel. there needs to be a major overhaul to the ATC system in this country
yeah, freakin privatize it. Get the government out!
@@SomebodyElse-43197I assume this is a joke right? Have you not watched the tons of videos with contracted ATC with worse attitudes and practices than these guys?
@@SomebodyElse-43197 private ATC is an absolute joke
We don't know, maybe ILS was down. The controller should have given him more details. The controller seemed surprised at the company policy. Is this the first Luthansa night flight he has handled? The Pilot was starved for info. Tired from a long flight and left in limbo with fuel getting low. Tell the pilot what is going on and give him accurate updates. Pilots in these situations hate being left hanging. A time, not too distant, will come when we no longer need controllers or pilots for that matter...that will show them!
@@SomebodyElse-43197 Terrible idea!
The pilot in command has the authority to refuse a visual approach, but, according to AIM Paragraphs 5-4-23 and 5-5-11, the PIC must advise ATC " ... as soon as possible if a visual approach is not desired."
Did the pilot inform Approach on initial contact that a visual was not acceptable? We don't know. If he did, it was the controller's responsibility to accommodate the aircraft and to clear them for an ILS approach. If he waited until he was cleared for the visual to raise the issue, then it can be argued that the pilot did not fulfill his responsibility to give ATC advance notice.
That controller is a passive aggressive narcissist who needs to be fired.
Can pilots give ATC a number to call? 😂
I don't get why lufthansa couldn't just land inbetween these "visual aircrafts" with a bit more sepperation. Can sameone pls explain?
Because ATC is getting worse every day.
Becuase that “little more separation” is 2.5 miles compared to like half a mile when running visuals. It was an arrival rush and you need to squeeze as many aircraft as possible into the visuals. An ILS would back up the entire flow setup a hour earlier
@@fly2golf985 yeah, well that's ATC's job. I wish I could skip the parts of my job that I don't like !
@@TommyRaines yeah you’re not wrong. The idea of the holding wasn’t bad but the lack of giving information
What I don't understand is why every other aircraft arriving can do a visual at night, but Lufthansa cannot. There certainly must be other Lufthansa arrivals at SFO after dark.
So to clear it up a bit: The issue wasn‘t that Lufthansa Pilots can‘t do visual approaches at night, the issue was that they also had to maintain visual separation themselves which they are only allowed to do during the day. But rather than explaining that to ATC the simple “request ILS“ along with the brief explanation the LH crew gave should‘ve been more than enough for them to receive a standard ILS approach.
They're not advertising Close Spaced Parallel Approaches on ATIS, so they can't team somebody with the Lufthansa if he's not on a visual. He's a heavy so they have to use a 6 mile radar separation gap behind him. Basically NorCal had all their ducks lined up and Lufthansa walked in and said, "Hey instead of landing 4 planes, land me because I won't accept a visual and you're just hearing about it now."
Minus one plane because you can't parallel, minus 2 more planes because you're doubling the spacing. Controller didn't have a lot of options within the rules.
The arrogance of the alleged Controller is astounding, and I worked as a Controller for decades!
So you're working arrivals during high peak time. You have everyone following the arrival into three different airports, going faster in the process to fit more airplanes in at a given time.
The weather conditions are perfect for a visual approach and allows you to fit more airplanes into a given airport with very close parallel runways, closer than the standard minimum, so long as said visual airplanes keep greater separation.
At the very end of the arrival, a airplane calls you on the radio and informs you they want the approach that requires greater separation minima and they will not maintain visual separation of the traffic.
They also clog up the radio to explain their company policies while you're trying to give course instructions for a landing airplane.
You're saying the controller is arrogant for telling the airplane to STOP long conversations on a busy frequency, giving them an EFC time, and advising them of said delays and what their alternate airport will be?
Decades at a level 4
Seeing the other traffic on this one would have been really handy. If I remember correctly, for a parallel approach to happen both aircraft need visual separation from each, so that would mean DLH would have to be staggered on the approach. It's easy to say the controller messed up when there's only one aircraft on the screen
It think it’s well past time SFO got razed and the Bay Area built a properly-sized airport. They’re serving 82,000 passengers a day with the same number of runways as airports that are lucky to serve 15,000. It’s absolutely ridiculous and it’s not going to get any better over the next decade (at which point the runway design will be 100 years old).
Unbelievable 😮