Yes, SW is totally in the right. She forgot that she instructed him to lineup. Then has the audacity to deny she fugged up!. Lots of verbal diarrhoea, from the controller, and not much planning.
When were the Alaska and United aircraft cleared to land as doesn’t say in the audio. Once cleared to land nobody should cross the runway. Should have kept SW waiting next to 28L or at least hold short 28R
Gotta speak shorthand on the radio as the tower controller in a high traffic airport like SFO. Sounds like a stressful situation. Still funny to hear the snarky responses.
I was about to comment that... I sometimes hope there would be more pilots replying with things along the lines of "We know the reasons" or something like that. I hope the pilots filed reports on that.
He really didn’t, the controller told him to line up and wait. Honestly if I was her I would’ve either cleared the Southwest for take off or have the guy hold short. I would have not have the guy line up and wait when there’s someone on final.
The aviation world is a small world: you don't need the number: it's already in your phone! I don't know why they use the number scheme: they could simply say to call over landline and the number should be in the paperwork for the flight trip. If you need something from the tower you could call them over your mobile phone and you don't need to do it over frequency. I hope they file a report for the runway incursions as there should be something done but you never know as the pilots report to the airline (a go around is expensive) and the airlines decide if they would escalate it. They could warn other pilots that there may be runway incursions at this airport regularly and the pilots should watch for themself.
Definitely on ATC for this one. Not only did UAL have to go around because SWA was crossing 28L, but ASA also had to go around because she lost track of the Southwest on 28R. Then she proceeds to say "I don't need an argument on frequency" and that both aircraft went around for "unknown reasons" 🙄after almost causing two separate runway incursions
I get not wanting to argue on frequency because it is busy, but the "unknown reasons" after literally just telling one of the planes to GA was ridiculous.
0:24 Southwest did exactly what they were told. 0:51 could have been their takeoff clearance but the transmission was blocked and Southwest rightly did not takeoff.
I think you are spot on, she gave takeoff clearance for 28R @0:51 but 'who to' was the issue. so in her mind she had given clearance. Identifying who she was talk to at the end of the transmission would have helped (if not require) . With no readback she should have known her transmission had not been received/ understood. She knows how this works as she corrected UAL277 when on his "3600" readback was incorrect and said "3100", then UAL277 readback of 3100 was correct. The snakey "You're not supposed to be on the runway" was uncalled for and started an argument, but then got all high and mighty with “Don’t need an argument on frequency”
0:51 is definitely Southwest's takeoff clearance, but the callsign got stepped on by "and uh United 277 is going around." The real question is why she did not reengage with Southwest directly when there was no readback. I understand the controller not wanting an argument on frequency, but she didn't help things when she said "so you shouldn't be on the runway." The last clearance was to line up and wait. But even if there is some blame to be assigned, the real issue is trying to run operations at this high rate at a complicated airport like SFO that has a runway configuration that simply does not meet modern safety standards.
@@jqxok Shure, but that also opens the puss bag that is USA Aviation. Nowhere else i the world do they give a landing clearance (United 277 in this case) and try and squeeze in a Southwest takeoff while 277 is on final. I understand they have to do this to cope with volumes, but computer systems are out of date and infrastructure improvements are slow. As its SFO I'm surprised they don't have an app for this, as the current system is only marginally better waving a flag out the window of the 1930s
I believe this is the same woman who started a petty argument with a Delta pilot because they took too long on the runway. She’s a real piece of work. Makes me wonder what qualities they’re looking for in candidates. 🤔
“Don’t need an argument on frequency”? A one sentence explanation of how they followed your instructions isn’t an argument. “Unknown reason”? The other aircraft went around because the runway was occupied because you told SWA to line up and wait on the runway. Controller needs a break to get her snippy CYA attitude adjusted.
Most of the women police dispatchers are like this here in California, they argue and they ask dumb questions or ask you where you are after you just told them exactly where you were and just seem to have a bitchy attitude sorry to say. Only other group of females I've seen act that way is nurses, also no offense to any of the wonderful nurses and dispatchers, you are all hero's. Just remember when you deal with people, they maybe or probably are having one of if not the worst days/time/pain in their lives and or are victims...so be nice and treat others with respect like you'd want to be treated. It is sad when adults act like spoiled little kids.
She sounds either stressed or simply self-serving ... Either way, she needs to be pulled out for some attitude adjustment and trained for SERVING the traffic and users of the system.
No that works 100 times because the pilots taxi like they are checked out in the plane. Those guys were students. If thats how you fly, stick to the little airports!
He kinda did. The frequency was busy and he decided to get defensive, he was right and the tower controller knew it. He should have just read back his instructions. There is a time and a place to sort it out, but a busy tower frequency at a major class B airport ain't it.
@@philbirk I'm torn. She falsely said he shouldn't be on the runway after she told him to line up and wait. He was just correcting the statement for the record. Not the best place to argue, sure, but if she throws the accusation out, I can't blame him for making it clear what he'd been told.
@@Astro95Media I think it was good that SW informed the controller what they perceived; i think sharing with all on frequency what he heard added useful info to the big picture for all, thus contributing to situational awareness.
@@philbirk SW was just clarifying what he was told to do and tower couldn't own up to her mistake. EGO problem, It took all of 5 seconds maybe to tell tower. Maybe clarifying with tower will make tower pay attention a little better. I get its a busy airport but you saying there is a time and place to sort it out is just silly.
Even worse was it took the UA flight a few times stating Go Around before the ATC got it and gave clear instructions. I mean, the pilots should have briefed the landing before hand and know what the go around procedure was, so they technically don't need her. But it's important to have everyone on the same page so we don't get situations like this.
@@jackielinde7568, they don't need approval from ATC for go around. They just go around and inform ATC. They did it out of precaution to keep taking off traffic aware that other aircraft above them is going around.
@@jakeoesterreich8037 and @Andrius Olišauskas need to get together to get your stories straight. And I believe if you both go back and read what I said, you'd see: 1. I said they should have briefed and know what the missed approach route is before starting the landing approach. (It's posted on the plates.) 2. Because of that, they don't technically need her instructions. 3. But it's important to keep everyone on the same page... Meaning it was getting busy, and this way to let everyone in the area knew who was going where.
@@jackielinde7568 like I said, if they are on a VISUAL approach, there is no plate for that, which means there is no published missed approach. Regardless, they are likely following the ILS anyway as a backup even if they aren’t actually cleared for the ILS however they can’t use those missed approach instructions. If they were originally cleared for the ILS, they follow the missed approach instructions no problem, unless tower gives them otherwise.
Hard to tell but I’d lean towards stressed over arrogant. High traffic with added go arounds aint great and it means the ATC tower is going to be watching even more now to avoid a crash.
Nah. If you’ve ever flown in SFO the last two weeks you’d know how tight the window’s been with the 1s being out. Southwest took their sweet time taxiing there. 1000% not on the controller
@@spartanslaxwax it's also not the pilots fault either. They can taxi as slow as they want and it's up to ATC to provide the separation not the pilots.
@@spartanslaxwax 100000% not on the controller??? Not a chance. Controller lost focus and dropped the ball. She didn’t remember giving Southwest clearance on a runway with landing aircraft. She lost situational awareness
@@spartanslaxwax He got instructed to line up and wait on 28R. Also SW doesn't have to go rocket speed, if tower wanted them to be fast they should have said ''no delay'' ''expedite'' or any other lingo that let's southwest know to speed up their line up
Definitely the towers mistake calling the SW pilot out. He was indeed cleared to line up and wait 28R but was never issued a clear for takeoff clearance unless the transmission was blocked, which is likely as there were a few blocked messages in transmission during this clip.
But there is a procedure for that, the readback. I didn't hear the readback and there is no way the tower did either because it's not there from what I'm hearing. "Initial read back of ... departure ... clearance should include the runway assignment, including left, right, center, etc. if applicable."
Don't need an argument on freq? Yeah, whatever. And the snide comment - you shouldn't be on the runway - was unnecessary as well. We all make mistakes - ATC should have owned that one.
I first heard about this story from local news here in the bay area, and I am not sure if it is due to a lack of available content or just trying to keep the segment short but they all showed the audio from basically 1:28 to 1:52. This portrayed the Southwest pilot in a really bad light - they portrayed it as if Southwest wasn't even supposed to be on either runway. Figured there was more going on here so I am glad you have posted the full version where you can specifically hear the Southwest pilot getting cleared to cross and line up.
this and the other SFO video from a few days show planes frequently crossing 28L to 28R and vice versa. I can understand that this happened on rare occasions but it feels like it's every time. Can't they be like EWR and have one RW for landing and one for takeoff?
Ok fine, she made a mistake. But “unknown reasons”?! A mistake is fine, it’s how we learn - but not if we arrogantly try and pass blame, denying that any error was made in the first place. This could have been catastrophic, yet the Controller seems to shrug it off while blaming both Southwest and “unknown” reasons. Pathetic
And she yelled at Delta pilots in similar situation in the past lol, someone really need to look into this problem before she lets fatal accident happens.
tbh, that was the one thing i think she did right: she was unclear about what happened, and didn't assign blame on frequency. she's currently quite busy and imo overloaded with work, so putting the issue aside for now and review it when she's not in the hot seat seems the best option there
Just my opinion, but sounded like she was sure they supposed to hold short, so when pilots said they were blocked she didn't understand how they managed to get on the runway without takeoff clearance.
@@kisstune nah I think she intended for them to line up and wait and go. At busy airports like SFO that's what you do. Line up and wait generally means get ready because once you get clearance we need you to go because there are planes incoming. She was right in issuing the line up and wait. She issues takeoff clearance but that doesn't get heard. She likely also gave VERY little margin for error meaning planes just have to go quickly because SFO can get pretty busy on 28R / 28L with landings and takeoff operations. At this point she forgets there was never a read back and goes on a blaming spree. This is nothing new what she's doing. Plenty of go-arounds happen at SFO because of tight traffic management--sometimes too tight. Her blaming was wrong and she should've recognized she tried to squeeze in planes too quickly.
She was up for an argument last time this happened a few weeks ago, why not now? If this keeps happening maybe it's time for SFO to re-evaluate their procedures
My blood is boiling at the arrogance of this controller 🤬🤬🤬 She tells the Southwest he "shouldn't be on the runway"... Then has the audacity to say "doesn't need an argument on frequency!" The unprofessional narrative is controlled by her so Southwest went to her level....she got pissed because of her own ill discipline.
Some comments have suggested this is the same woman who DID have an argument with a pilot recently... So her "don't need an argument" comment may be due to her having been told off for the previous argument. She sounds like she's as good as that job as I would be, anyway... Which is not very good.
Someone needed a nap. Unfortunately superior attitude this is all too common with some controllers, who’ve lost sight of the fact that they are in a support role for aircraft, not the other way around. Hey, if you don’t have the temperament or mental ability to do the job, find something else to do.
ATC don't need arguments on frequency. Pilots don't need arguments on frequency. ATC screwed up but just accept ATC screwed up, follow the latest instructions, and then file a report and sort it out later.
TWR: I don't need an argument on the frequency! SWA: Agreed. Let's do this on the landline. Possible Tower deviation. I have a phone number for you to call. Advise when ready to copy.
Hold up! I think this is the same controller who got into that argument with Delta 1384 about a month ago when they needed more time to change runways prior to takeoff. This lady is DANGEROUS!! How the heck is she still working?
I think you are right, this lady is dangerous to herself and the flying public she needs to be placed on leave right now. I would definitely do a mental evaluation.
Was literally thinking the exact same thing. The minute I saw this video I knew it was the same controller. She does not seem to act professional at all performing her duties, as I see in this video and the one you mentioned. She was being rude to both the pilot in the other video and this one as well. She is now also starting to seem like she is not being safe or cautious, if not maybe even reckless.
Noticed the same thing! Completely unprofessional on her part, Southwest was just stating they never got a clearance and she gets all defensive? Huh?! She needs to be retrained.
The Southest crew did nothing wrong. They were cleared to line up and wait, that's what they did. The atcnever received a readback and that should have alerted her.
SW received a cross 28L and line up and wait on 28R instruction. Watching the animation with the timing of the radio transmissions SW apparently had not cleared the safety zone (250ft to each side of the runway centerline) for 28L when United initially announced their go around, and were not in position on 28R to depart when the possible takeoff clearance was blocked by the second United go around transmission. It appears that SW was doing a slow taxi for unknown reasons which affected the inbound United and Alaska flights (and technically caused 2 runway incursions). There is blame to be apportioned to both tower ATC and SW based on how I see the information presented. ATC didn't specify that SW needed to 'expedite' or 'cross without delay' for runway 28L with addition of 'traffic on X mile final' to inform SW that there was other traffic inbound. SW needed to state that they were 'unable to comply' if they were not going to be able to cross, and line up in sufficient time, or were not ready (incomplete checklists, or configuration of aircraft).
@@CLTmech no way the animation is an accurate depiction of plane positions. its a simple "visual" for story telling purposes. there were no cameras recording these planes, distances and locations are all approximated
@@CLTmechYeah, no matter what, if you’re crossing an active runway, you don’t do a slow, lazy cross, you expedite it. Also it’s possible Southwest heard some of the takeoff clearance, and if they did, and heard what we heard, they should have at least asked tower if they were cleared to go. It could have been totally blocked tho, what we heard may not be what they heard. I feel the majority of blame is on the controller, but there may be a small part of the blame on Southwest. And for the controller to say they shouldn’t have been on the runway is just totally wrong, since she cleared them onto the runway.
0:50 the words GO AROUND were from the ASDE triggering a mandatory compliance go around instruction. Crazy to hear that in the background and it not even phase her. Hearing that in a tower will cause most controllers to shit their pants!
After going through it again, the tower broadcast the clearance for takeoff of SWA on 28R, but it was partially blocked so SWA did not read it back. The tower was immediately distracted by a go around and didn't realize that the clearance was not read back, which lead to tower's confusion and eventually "You're not supposed to be on the runway". A challenging set of circumstances that lead to a cascading mix-up. Tower should have made sure that SWA had takeoff/taxi clearance to get off 28R before dealing with other aircraft.
Her clearance was blocked because another aircraft was going around because she had SW cross in front of a plane on final. She started this mess and luckily it only led to a verbal exchange when it could have ended up with a collision. If she didn't create problems she wouldn't have to fix them.
Yes, it was the pilot on the first go around who kept his mic keyed for 1.5 seconds too long, but it blocked the identifier for the SWA1159. That pilot knew it and tried to get Tower’s attention, but she wasn’t listening. She’s the one that never got the confirmation of the takeoff clearance, so she was way wrong to tell them that they shouldn’t be on the runway. Yes, it’s a busy class bravo frequency, but all the more reason to focus on the situation, rather than calling people out.
@@chevykid00and then promptly gave clearance for another aircraft to cross a runway in front of an aircraft that had *just* asked if they should slow down to not collide with the aircraft she had left on the runway?
This isn’t the first time this controller has gotten snippy with a flight crew on this channel. There was the issue with Delta and their take off numbers when they got switched to 28R that made it here too. Coaching is needed.
@@darrenhenderson3 If she's regularly screwing up and putting hundreds of lives at risk, then retraining is definitely required... Perhaps as a retail assistant or cat minder.
and FAA says they investigated and everything was fine?! What are they waiting for an accident before they do anything here with this controller in the tower!?
I find it quite funny that both UA277 and AS553 were both en route from IAD-SFO. They took off from the same runway in IAD almost back to back and got to SFO on Final paralleling each other.
“The last two aircraft went around. Unknown reason.” W H A T ????? Why didn’t ATC request, “Say reason for go-around?” of the aircraft before handing them off? The reason was the aircraft ON the runways! 🙄
The reason was that the ATC ordered an aircraft to cross one runway in order to line up and wait on another, gave take off clearance that wasn't read back, and then lost track of that aircraft. She knew she done goofed up when she made that statement.
@@jonathankleinow2073, yeah. I think ATC should have spent some time saying "Traffic on the runway instead of unknown reason". Now approach will hear "Unknown reason" after asking for reason for go-around and call tower to find out which will make more people more busy.
Plainly the word(s) before "...takeoff" were blocked and 179 quickly tried to communicate that to ATC. Had the partially blocked instruction been "...cancel takeoff" and 179 rolled, she would have lost it then too. She needs a debriefing and further awareness training before calling a pilot out on frequency then telling him to pipe down. All my opinion of course
I think she needs some retraining.... Preferably something like retail. Especially if she really is the same one who had an argument with a pilot not that long ago.
Doubt she will. From the sounds of it she has an I am always right and everyone else is always wrong mentality. Especially given the other comments about her doing this in a few other cases.
What is there to report about if it's completely legal? Where in the FAA Handbook does it say you cant have a plane on the runway when there is a plane on final?
The closest I am to cockpit is when I use the forward restroom on an airliner, but this sure seemed like a controller issue to me. Maybe WN was moving slow? But he did what she told him to do and it looked like she cleared another plane to cross a runway at the end of the video with a plane close to landing.
@@ZenkaiAnkoku2 If she'd just departed the Southwest off 28L behind the United instead of trying for that last bit of efficiency, or sent the aircraft already short of 28R from there, would have all been fine.
Interesting that ATC didn’t even wait for SWA’s takeoff clearance readback… Southwest not reading back their takeoff clearance would have made it obvious that they didn’t receive it…
NTSB just had a hearing about runway incursion incidents earlier this week. I'm looking forward to them posting the video on here to see what conclusions they reached.
Except this was neither a runway incursion, nor a near miss. Just a controller losing situational awareness, which is fine so long as the other layers in the system don't also mess up in parallel. The number one layer is pilot awareness, and every crew did exactly the right thing at the right time. The entire system is designed to make sure one thing cannot kill you. It takes a lot of failures for this stuff to go horribly wrong. That's why commercial air travel in the US is the safest form of travel humanity has ever designed (maybe elsewhere, too. I just know the US stats).
@@FamilyManMoving I agree, this wasn't a runway incursion by definition. But it still warrants consideration with the similar incidents we've had recently in terms of reviewing current ATC practices and the multiple layers of safety you mentioned.
@@jonathankleinow2073 Agreed, because having multiple layers doesn't mean we strip one down to its minimum, hoping the others always work. I don't get out much beyond our busy airspace (three class Bs and a buncha smaller stuff), but some days the radio sounds like a cattle auction because its so busy. And that's only TRACON. Class B approach/departure is crazy busy, too. I think the controllers need better tools, and maybe a little more help.
Instead of saying "I dont need an argument..." when she was being given info that might help; "thank you" was all that was necessary...clears the frequency faster.
She says "Okay, so you shouldn't be on the runway..." but then tells the pilot she doesn't need an argument on the frequency. Aside from the fact that she instructed them to line up and wait, she essentially started an argument on the frequency by not limiting her conversation to the next instruction.
I love how she had the you are not supposed to be on the runway dig, but then when he said, correctly, he was cleared to line up and wait she became unruly.
Is this the “you should have checked NOTAMS” controller from a couple weeks ago? Southwest did exactly what they were told. Controller dropped the ball. “The previous two aircraft went around, unknown reasons.” YOU’RE THE REASON!
as other esteemed posters said this is the same controller from a few weeks back, she seems to enjoy having departing aircraft on the 28L side cross over to 28R and vice versa while bringing in arrivals on both runways at minimum spacing
I guarantee she isn't the only controller doing this. Also do you think she controls spacing on the final? That's up to the final controller. She can make very minor adjustments such as reduce to final approach speed but besides that it's up to final.
Tower lost track of the entire situation. Once WN started rolling across 28L triggered the first go around, but it took UA several times saying they were going around for the ATC to pick up that she had a flight "going around". By that time, WN was rolling into position on 28R, her clearance to WN was stepped on and lost in the Go Around instructions, causing WN not to get it and triggering the second Go Around with AL.
This close call was first reported in great detail in San Francisco Chronicle. I am certain this controller is very good at her job. (It takes years of training and experience to become a Level One Controller in a place like SFO.) However, I would send to London Heathrow for a couple of weeks, to learn how to listen, speak slow and calm! Speaking like you’re announcing a cattle auction, causes blocked communications and chaos.
It would have been great if SWA would have come back with the: "I have a number for you to call, advise when ready to copy." 🤣 SWA was totally in the right on with this.
Southwest should not have been cleared to cross 28L. They had only 30 seconds after that before UAL777 announced their go around. I just did some math based on this: 700 feet altitude of UAL777 shortly after announcing go around, 3 degree standard slide slope, approach speed somewhere around 140 knots, taxi speeds, air plane length and runway width. Based on those numbers Southwest was cleared to taxi across 28L, when UAL777 was within 3 miles of landing there. That is way less than 90 seconds out. At taxi speed it would roughly take 20 seconds to even pass the runway. That is when already at taxi speed, not from a stand. So, Southwest was in the middle of that runway, when UAL777 was less than a minute and about 600 feet AG out. At which point any reasonable airline would make their pilots go around, I assume.
Wow, ATC is getting aggressive there. Maybe Southwest could have moved a little faster but it seemed pretty reasonable. ATC should have had them wait at 28L for those planes to come in.
😂I don't disagree, but I never thought I would read the words "Southwest could have moved a little faster" online. They have a reputation as fast movers (which is maybe why the controller messed up here, thinking that they would get themselves across 28L faster than they did)?
I’m pretty sure I had this same controller set me up for a situation similar to this. Line up and wait on 28R for a Cirrus Jet to depart downfield, with an airliner on about a 4 mile final. As soon as we got the clearance, I told the PF that “this isn’t going to work out”. When it didn’t work out, the controller had to frantically ask us to expedite up to the next taxiway and exit. The Cirrus was barely over the departure end of the runway by the time the airliner touched down.
This woman is not qualified to be in that tower. I've heard here multiple times thinking other people made a mistake when it was her mistake. "line up and wait" means line up on the runway, that's what you told him to do
This controller was well behind the ball in this case. I don't know how long she has been in the business, but she needs reassignment and training before being placed back in swift thinking role. She's getting a go-around alert that is audible in the background. Then while she is handing off UAL 277 in the 5 consecutive truncated transmission a handoff she should have been already handed the AS flight a go-around instruction if she was truly up to par here.
This really infuriates me the level of arrogant and blaming that this controller has done due to her stuff up. Personally she needs to be stood down immediately, played the tape of what she’s done wrong, write a letter of apology to the SWA pilots and get retrained again (Or just terminated from her job).
If you don’t want an argument, lady…. don’t fucking start one. “You aren’t supposed to be on the runway” is extraneous and unprofessional banter and warranted a response. Mark the tape and sup’s number, please.
I know it’s common procedure in the US, but it boggles my mind on how you issue clearance to land when the cleared aircraft actually does not have the runway completely empty or clear. ATC clears aircraft to land when they are no.2 on the approach. ATC clears aircraft to land when there’s people on the runway taking off. ATC clears aircraft to land when there’s someone crossing the runway. I find that very weird. In most countries, aircraft are only cleared to land if the runway is 100% empty and no aircraft is ever gonna be on that runway from the moment one aircraft is cleared to land. Yeah it is procedure and makes sense for US airspace and pilots flying there. But the idea of giving clearance to land to an aircraft when it’s not actually clear to land is nonsense.
Some minds can be "Boggled" quicker than others. It is called "anticipated separation", the clearance is issued, with the intention that no conflicts exist, at the time the arrival crosses the landing threshold. The controller stays focused on the rwy and the arrivals, it is a joy to use.
@@rubenvillanueva8635 Why not simply wait until the runway is 100% clear than anticipate a condition that may not reflect reality? Simply say "continue approach, no 2 for landing". And when the runway is actually clear, a clearance is issued. Controller is still gonna be focused on the runway, and situation awareness will be increased.
@@gabrieltassi4030 Americans defend the "cleared to land (as long as x number of things go right)" system vociferously, as if there isn't a better way to do things, usually citing busy airspace as a reason to use this system as opposed to a reason not to. To me, if this system *is* safe, the corollary would be that aircraft can be cleared for takeoff in the same way -- you're taxiing to the runway, the aircraft ahead are probably going to be fine, so go for it
I prefer the US system, especially when only one radio modulation is required to give a landing clearance, instead of two takes ("continue approach" and "cleared to land"). In busy radio environment, cutting transmissions is absolutely a plus to get things going straight.
@@gabrieltassi4030 I am only going by experience, I have used this procedure, during my career, trained others, and never had a problem. If a controller wants to wait until the aircraft clears at the end, so be it, it is his choice.
ATC should be calling a number so she can have a bit of retraining... I'm sure she will love listening and watching this video over and over a few times and realize it was HER mistake.. and to say "the last 2 aircraft went around for SOME REASON" just shows she lost control of the situation... how could she not know they went around because she left an aircraft on the runway!?!
ATC -- very full of herself. The point is not how fast and cool she can act out playing dictator, but to communicate clearly (poor diction) and support pilots (without attitude) and manage traffic (competently without jams and confusion). If traffic didn't get a message because blocked, it's her responsibility to deal with that, not preach and act like a monster. If several planes are having problems, what do they all have in common? The ATC. At least San Francisco is consistent....it seems the airport is just as bad as the number of heroin-needles on the street and the rate of violent crime in the city itself... Welcome to SF! Have a nice day!
I don't know that's anything to be happy to see. The difference is you're not handling real lives when you mess up as a simmer. True, the job is incredibly difficult, but one should be happy to see a professional mess up this badly where they can affect lives.
This very easily could've been a repeat of what happened at Los Angeles in 1991, ATC telling a plane to line up on the runway and then forgetting about them, and then clearing another aircraft to land on the same runway. Planes couldn't see each other and a 737 landed ON TOP of a metroliner, killing 35 people. She not only put two planes in a dangerous scenario, when called out on HER fault, she deflects and basically says "Shut up" with that "I don't need an argument". It's not an argument, you made a mistake and were called out. Correct it, don't deflect with your arrogance. In most scenarios, arrogance makes you an asshole. In aviation, arrogance is a killer.
This sounds like the same snippy controller that got into it with a Delta plane about a month ago when they got a last minute runway change before departure and had to run some new numbers. th-cam.com/video/XZzBTZctiAg/w-d-xo.html I know it’s a fast paced environment but this particular controller likes to talk over other people it seems. My ex-wife was former ATC and she always talks over people. Coincidence?🤔😂
You're right, the voice sounds 100% the same. There seems to be a pattern here of not being able to handle high loads of traffic in an efficient manner, instead getting into arguments with pilots and forcing planes to go around. Maybe someone should find her a more quiet facility...
I've seen a lot of newspaper headlines saying two planes almost landed on occupied runways and close calls at SFO. I don't think it's true there were any close calls, but definitely too close for comfort. Both United and Alaska initiated go-arounds without ATC having to tell them, even though she finally did instruct them. The FAA has said it does not consider the incident a runway incursion. But the ATC F'd this one up badly. She actually tells a pilot on final to caution wake from "two unknown" g-arounds. Unknown?!! Umm, you knew. (🙄) I will say I don't understand why the first officer on the Southwest couldn't see the Alaska so close before they made the decision to continue with ATC's instruction of line up and wait. I'd like to know more about that. But it was not a deviation. She's (ATC) the one who needed to be given a phone number.
I simpathized with tower until the "unknown reasons". I understand making a mistake, and I also understand the "i don't want an argument on frequency" as the radio was pretty busy at that time (although SWA was right on telling the controller imho, if a communication issue occurred and the two parties' awareness of the situation diverged you really want to close that gap as soon as possible). What i don't understand is unnecessarily blocking the frequency to throw around unnecessary sass, seconds after telling a crew that they should not do so. That's just bossy behavior that has no place in ATC, especially at an airport as busy as SFO.
Regardless of how fast/slow SWA was taxing its obvious the local controller immediately lost track of them. No traffic point outs to landing aircraft about the crossing traffic and also missed the required point out of "traffic holding in position will be departing prior to your arrival", and also the required point out of landing traffic to the airplane holding in position. All of these call-outs were added as being required for good reason--and all of them being missed points to a controller getting a little behind.
[Local controller] "You shouldn't have been on the runway"... [also local controller] "I don't need an argument on frequency" Don't start nothing, won't be nothing. That's just too much traffic for those two tightly spaced runways with the 1s out of service. They are just begging for loss of separation or worse.
Controller screws up - twice - by putting an aircraft on both runways while others are on short final. Then gets bitchy when called out on it. Then does it AGAIN by having a 2nd aircraft cross 28R when Medivac is on short final! I hope she was disciplined for this and retrained.
This sounds like the same controller that scolded the pilot who didn’t setup for departure correctly and had plenty to say to that pilot but here she doesn’t want an argument. Sounds like the pilot here in this incident need to file a complaint.
It's still amazes me in such a high-paced environment in radio calls coming in and out within seconds, that it is still possible that Communications are blocked
She's done a mess!...and what an arrogance! 1st she forgets to give the clearance to take off and, even better (2nd) she says that the previous 2 airplanes approaching did a "go around for unknow reasons". Maybe she forgets that she herself instructed the second one to go around. OMG!
Im not a pilot but I'm learning to become one, wasn't that a bit close at the end for Jetspeed 641 to be crossing 28R with 6PH that close to landing on 28R?
Towers fault 100%, maybe SWA taxied slower than they thought (which is surprising) but tower lost track of them physically and comms wise… we all have to focus at the job but the ball was dropped very hard, “you shouldn’t be on the runway then”, where do you think they came from?! They just appeared out there? Shows SA was totally lost
I flew out of a small Delta airport with parallel runways and even they had separate controllers for the parallel runways. seems SFO should do the same to keep traffic chatter down to manageable levels.
I really don't/didn't hear an argument. What I think we're hearing is the pilot making sure it's included in any recording that he was where he was suppose to be.
Can someone more familiar with SFO explain to me why ATC is unwilling to position aircraft *between* the two parallel runways? Only the largest of planes would have trouble fitting into that space. They seem to enjoy giving pilots a "Cross what's right in front of you and line up & wait on the other runway" instruction. If they aren't going to request no delay, any inbounds better be at least 10 miles out. "Just head way the hell over there and go sit on the active" might be a safe operation for an airport that sees five landings per hour, not San Franfuckingcisco.
"runways 28 left and Right are too close together... closer than the standard, required spacing for parallel runways" "FAA-waived runway separation" There should be more personal for this workload and more late clearances. SFO is a hell (all 4 runways may be active at the same time) Why is taxiway B this way? If you "follow" B and miss the turn (onto B) you are on F or J. Why there some hold shorts sign's only on one side (or on the wrong side) of the taxiway? And what's with taxiway T.
SWA was cleared to line up and wait, yes, but you can't accept a clearance if you know you're going to proceed into a traffic conflict. I was always taught that, regardless of any clearance, you have to watch crossing active runways. The first consideration is landing traffic when crossing or proceeding onto an active runway. Part of the problem, here, may be the space between the right and left runways, but SWA was clearly lingering at the threshold of 28L when there was landing traffic on short final. then, when they occupied 28R there was more traffic on short final... If there's no space to stop between 28L and 28R then there's probably not much SWA could do, but it's super important to consider landing traffic before accepting any clearance to cross or taxi onto any active runway.
Taxied and crossed a bit too slower than TWR expected, maybe? What's clear is that Southwest was indeed to be on the 28R runway.
Opinions?
Too little separation on this one.
Yes, SW is totally in the right. She forgot that she instructed him to lineup. Then has the audacity to deny she fugged up!. Lots of verbal diarrhoea, from the controller, and not much planning.
Agreed. Southwest was supposed to be there. She could have told him to expedite the taxi if he was moving too slow.
She never told him hold short 28R. He was supposed to be on the runway.
When were the Alaska and United aircraft cleared to land as doesn’t say in the audio. Once cleared to land nobody should cross the runway. Should have kept SW waiting next to 28L or at least hold short 28R
When she said, "Unknown reason." I laughed out loud..
Either in denial or not watching events at the end of the runway--or both.
Were you expecting, "Cuz I done goofed"? 🙂
We have an Unknown in the tower...
Gotta speak shorthand on the radio as the tower controller in a high traffic airport like SFO. Sounds like a stressful situation. Still funny to hear the snarky responses.
I was about to comment that... I sometimes hope there would be more pilots replying with things along the lines of "We know the reasons" or something like that. I hope the pilots filed reports on that.
The SW pilot wasn’t arguing. He was trying to rectify a potential communication issue.
LOL he was telling her that she was as fault! Thats perfectly fine
Woman was probably a biden diversity hire.
She was mad about being called out for being dumb.
He really didn’t, the controller told him to line up and wait. Honestly if I was her I would’ve either cleared the Southwest for take off or have the guy hold short. I would have not have the guy line up and wait when there’s someone on final.
“Unknown reasons”. Ummm. Safety?
Southwest should give ATC a number to call for controller deviation.
Agree totally
Best comment 😄
The aviation world is a small world: you don't need the number: it's already in your phone! I don't know why they use the number scheme: they could simply say to call over landline and the number should be in the paperwork for the flight trip.
If you need something from the tower you could call them over your mobile phone and you don't need to do it over frequency.
I hope they file a report for the runway incursions as there should be something done but you never know as the pilots report to the airline (a go around is expensive) and the airlines decide if they would escalate it. They could warn other pilots that there may be runway incursions at this airport regularly and the pilots should watch for themself.
@@losttownstreet3409 the tower no doubt had to file a report for this, atleast a category C runway incursion
Came here to say that!
Definitely on ATC for this one. Not only did UAL have to go around because SWA was crossing 28L, but ASA also had to go around because she lost track of the Southwest on 28R. Then she proceeds to say "I don't need an argument on frequency" and that both aircraft went around for "unknown reasons" 🙄after almost causing two separate runway incursions
at one point you can hear the runway incursion warning going off in her background audio, i think!
I get not wanting to argue on frequency because it is busy, but the "unknown reasons" after literally just telling one of the planes to GA was ridiculous.
Yes the controller was a definite snot; she has a dangerous attitude.
No doubt ATC broad was at fault here.
No argument in chat, nuff said.
@@mscman13 I think she said unknown to make it short. Pilot will usually ask for the reason for go around as companies usually need to know
0:24 Southwest did exactly what they were told. 0:51 could have been their takeoff clearance but the transmission was blocked and Southwest rightly did not takeoff.
I think you are spot on, she gave takeoff clearance for 28R @0:51 but 'who to' was the issue. so in her mind she had given clearance. Identifying who she was talk to at the end of the transmission would have helped (if not require) . With no readback she should have known her transmission had not been received/ understood. She knows how this works as she corrected UAL277 when on his "3600" readback was incorrect and said "3100", then UAL277 readback of 3100 was correct.
The snakey "You're not supposed to be on the runway" was uncalled for and started an argument, but then got all high and mighty with “Don’t need an argument on frequency”
@@qbi4614 I believe that’s the concept of “don’t start nothin’, won’t be nothin’”
0:51 is definitely Southwest's takeoff clearance, but the callsign got stepped on by "and uh United 277 is going around." The real question is why she did not reengage with Southwest directly when there was no readback. I understand the controller not wanting an argument on frequency, but she didn't help things when she said "so you shouldn't be on the runway." The last clearance was to line up and wait. But even if there is some blame to be assigned, the real issue is trying to run operations at this high rate at a complicated airport like SFO that has a runway configuration that simply does not meet modern safety standards.
@@jqxok Shure, but that also opens the puss bag that is USA Aviation. Nowhere else i the world do they give a landing clearance (United 277 in this case) and try and squeeze in a Southwest takeoff while 277 is on final. I understand they have to do this to cope with volumes, but computer systems are out of date and infrastructure improvements are slow.
As its SFO I'm surprised they don't have an app for this, as the current system is only marginally better waving a flag out the window of the 1930s
I believe this is the same woman who started a petty argument with a Delta pilot because they took too long on the runway. She’s a real piece of work. Makes me wonder what qualities they’re looking for in candidates. 🤔
“Don’t need an argument on frequency”? A one sentence explanation of how they followed your instructions isn’t an argument. “Unknown reason”? The other aircraft went around because the runway was occupied because you told SWA to line up and wait on the runway. Controller needs a break to get her snippy CYA attitude adjusted.
Yes that controller was a snot who does not take correction well - a dangerous attitude in a profession that should be dedicated to safety over ego.
Most of the women police dispatchers are like this here in California, they argue and they ask dumb questions or ask you where you are after you just told them exactly where you were and just seem to have a bitchy attitude sorry to say. Only other group of females I've seen act that way is nurses, also no offense to any of the wonderful nurses and dispatchers, you are all hero's. Just remember when you deal with people, they maybe or probably are having one of if not the worst days/time/pain in their lives and or are victims...so be nice and treat others with respect like you'd want to be treated. It is sad when adults act like spoiled little kids.
She sounds either stressed or simply self-serving ...
Either way, she needs to be pulled out for some attitude adjustment and trained for SERVING the traffic and users of the system.
"I don't need an argument on frequency, how dare you call me out for being incompetent?"
No that works 100 times because the pilots taxi like they are checked out in the plane. Those guys were students. If thats how you fly, stick to the little airports!
Poor southwest guy didnt deserve that
He kinda did. The frequency was busy and he decided to get defensive, he was right and the tower controller knew it. He should have just read back his instructions. There is a time and a place to sort it out, but a busy tower frequency at a major class B airport ain't it.
@@philbirk I'm torn. She falsely said he shouldn't be on the runway after she told him to line up and wait. He was just correcting the statement for the record. Not the best place to argue, sure, but if she throws the accusation out, I can't blame him for making it clear what he'd been told.
@@Astro95Media I think it was good that SW informed the controller what they perceived; i think sharing with all on frequency what he heard added useful info to the big picture for all, thus contributing to situational awareness.
@@philbirk SW was just clarifying what he was told to do and tower couldn't own up to her mistake. EGO problem, It took all of 5 seconds maybe to tell tower. Maybe clarifying with tower will make tower pay attention a little better. I get its a busy airport but you saying there is a time and place to sort it out is just silly.
@@philbirk Agreed!
“Line up and wait”. Couple seconds later “okay so you shouldn’t be on the runway”
Even worse was it took the UA flight a few times stating Go Around before the ATC got it and gave clear instructions. I mean, the pilots should have briefed the landing before hand and know what the go around procedure was, so they technically don't need her. But it's important to have everyone on the same page so we don't get situations like this.
@@jackielinde7568, they don't need approval from ATC for go around. They just go around and inform ATC. They did it out of precaution to keep taking off traffic aware that other aircraft above them is going around.
@@jackielinde7568 they most certainly need her to give them missed approach instructions if they’re on a visual approach
@@jakeoesterreich8037 and @Andrius Olišauskas need to get together to get your stories straight. And I believe if you both go back and read what I said, you'd see:
1. I said they should have briefed and know what the missed approach route is before starting the landing approach. (It's posted on the plates.)
2. Because of that, they don't technically need her instructions.
3. But it's important to keep everyone on the same page... Meaning it was getting busy, and this way to let everyone in the area knew who was going where.
@@jackielinde7568 like I said, if they are on a VISUAL approach, there is no plate for that, which means there is no published missed approach. Regardless, they are likely following the ILS anyway as a backup even if they aren’t actually cleared for the ILS however they can’t use those missed approach instructions. If they were originally cleared for the ILS, they follow the missed approach instructions no problem, unless tower gives them otherwise.
it's rare that i don't feel at least sympathy for the person who made the error. But this controller was dangerously arrogant.
Hard to tell but I’d lean towards stressed over arrogant. High traffic with added go arounds aint great and it means the ATC tower is going to be watching even more now to avoid a crash.
Nah. If you’ve ever flown in SFO the last two weeks you’d know how tight the window’s been with the 1s being out.
Southwest took their sweet time taxiing there. 1000% not on the controller
@@spartanslaxwax it's also not the pilots fault either. They can taxi as slow as they want and it's up to ATC to provide the separation not the pilots.
@@spartanslaxwax 100000% not on the controller??? Not a chance. Controller lost focus and dropped the ball. She didn’t remember giving Southwest clearance on a runway with landing aircraft. She lost situational awareness
@@spartanslaxwax He got instructed to line up and wait on 28R. Also SW doesn't have to go rocket speed, if tower wanted them to be fast they should have said ''no delay'' ''expedite'' or any other lingo that let's southwest know to speed up their line up
Definitely the towers mistake calling the SW pilot out. He was indeed cleared to line up and wait 28R but was never issued a clear for takeoff clearance unless the transmission was blocked, which is likely as there were a few blocked messages in transmission during this clip.
even if it was blocked, she never got a readback so its still on her.
But there is a procedure for that, the readback. I didn't hear the readback and there is no way the tower did either because it's not there from what I'm hearing. "Initial read back of ... departure ... clearance should include the runway assignment, including left, right, center, etc. if applicable."
Wasn't this the same controller who had issues with the aircraft who did not read the ATIS?
@@SomeRandomGuy789 Yep.
There is a point just as 277 is going around she clears someone to takeoff 28R, wonder if that was for the southwest
He wasn’t arguing he was just stating the last thing he heard.
To women that's arguing lol
@@raptexalicious866 😂
@@raptexalicious866 yup accountability is woman's Kryptonite.
Don't need an argument on freq? Yeah, whatever. And the snide comment - you shouldn't be on the runway - was unnecessary as well. We all make mistakes - ATC should have owned that one.
yeah once she realized she was going to lose the argument she started because SHE fucked up, she had to try to make them look bad for arguing.
Female PMS ATC
@@Cadence-qt2ux you're a troll grunting under his bridge
@@Cadence-qt2ux That's just what we need, aircraft movements and safety being dictated by hormone fluctuations.
“You shouldn’t be on the runway”
“You put us here 🤷🏻♂️”
I first heard about this story from local news here in the bay area, and I am not sure if it is due to a lack of available content or just trying to keep the segment short but they all showed the audio from basically 1:28 to 1:52. This portrayed the Southwest pilot in a really bad light - they portrayed it as if Southwest wasn't even supposed to be on either runway. Figured there was more going on here so I am glad you have posted the full version where you can specifically hear the Southwest pilot getting cleared to cross and line up.
Please share it everywhere so everbody can check this version out and clarify
Go figure the news media would use misinformation to make an innocent person look like they are in the wrong.
I heard the same thing, "Southwest causes two go-arounds". This was clearly the controller's fault.
this and the other SFO video from a few days show planes frequently crossing 28L to 28R and vice versa. I can understand that this happened on rare occasions but it feels like it's every time. Can't they be like EWR and have one RW for landing and one for takeoff?
The media gets off on making carriers that don't market to the upper class look bad, I swear.
I don't need an argument on frequency, especially when I am wrong!! You shall obey!
Ok fine, she made a mistake. But “unknown reasons”?! A mistake is fine, it’s how we learn - but not if we arrogantly try and pass blame, denying that any error was made in the first place. This could have been catastrophic, yet the Controller seems to shrug it off while blaming both Southwest and “unknown” reasons. Pathetic
And she yelled at Delta pilots in similar situation in the past lol, someone really need to look into this problem before she lets fatal accident happens.
tbh, that was the one thing i think she did right: she was unclear about what happened, and didn't assign blame on frequency. she's currently quite busy and imo overloaded with work, so putting the issue aside for now and review it when she's not in the hot seat seems the best option there
Its women. Can't accept any responsibility for their actions. That's why they're allowed to abort perfectly healthy babies.
Yeah that likely made the approaching pilots on edge thinking there is wind sheer
She knows she never got a readback on the takeoff clearance. That really should have been the end of it.
Just my opinion, but sounded like she was sure they supposed to hold short, so when pilots said they were blocked she didn't understand how they managed to get on the runway without takeoff clearance.
@@andy-ally …she’s the one who issued the line up and wait. Southwest was never issued a hold short instruction.
@@andy-ally That's my bet too. She probably meant to say hold short but instead gave line up and wait. That puts it on her.
@@kisstune No arguments on frequency!
@@kisstune nah I think she intended for them to line up and wait and go. At busy airports like SFO that's what you do. Line up and wait generally means get ready because once you get clearance we need you to go because there are planes incoming.
She was right in issuing the line up and wait. She issues takeoff clearance but that doesn't get heard. She likely also gave VERY little margin for error meaning planes just have to go quickly because SFO can get pretty busy on 28R / 28L with landings and takeoff operations. At this point she forgets there was never a read back and goes on a blaming spree. This is nothing new what she's doing. Plenty of go-arounds happen at SFO because of tight traffic management--sometimes too tight. Her blaming was wrong and she should've recognized she tried to squeeze in planes too quickly.
She was up for an argument last time this happened a few weeks ago, why not now? If this keeps happening maybe it's time for SFO to re-evaluate their procedures
lol it does sound like the same snippy controller from the other day regarding the pilot not having numbers for both runways
The procedures are fine. The staffing? Eh, maybe not so much
@@slappymcgillicuddy7532 It's exactly the same controller.
This controller simply sucks at her job
They can't fire her that would be sexist lol.
My blood is boiling at the arrogance of this controller 🤬🤬🤬 She tells the Southwest he "shouldn't be on the runway"...
Then has the audacity to say "doesn't need an argument on frequency!" The unprofessional narrative is controlled by her so Southwest went to her level....she got pissed because of her own ill discipline.
Some comments have suggested this is the same woman who DID have an argument with a pilot recently... So her "don't need an argument" comment may be due to her having been told off for the previous argument.
She sounds like she's as good as that job as I would be, anyway... Which is not very good.
Someone needed a nap. Unfortunately superior attitude this is all too common with some controllers, who’ve lost sight of the fact that they are in a support role for aircraft, not the other way around. Hey, if you don’t have the temperament or mental ability to do the job, find something else to do.
ATC don't need arguments on frequency. Pilots don't need arguments on frequency.
ATC screwed up but just accept ATC screwed up, follow the latest instructions, and then file a report and sort it out later.
@@HighSpeedChaser ATC started an argument saying they shouldn't be on the runway when they were cleared to line up and wait
TWR: I don't need an argument on the frequency!
SWA: Agreed. Let's do this on the landline. Possible Tower deviation. I have a phone number for you to call. Advise when ready to copy.
Hold up! I think this is the same controller who got into that argument with Delta 1384 about a month ago when they needed more time to change runways prior to takeoff. This lady is DANGEROUS!! How the heck is she still working?
I recognized that too! She should at a minimum not be a controller in Class Bravo
I think you are right, this lady is dangerous to herself and the flying public she needs to be placed on leave right now. I would definitely do a mental evaluation.
Was literally thinking the exact same thing. The minute I saw this video I knew it was the same controller. She does not seem to act professional at all performing her duties, as I see in this video and the one you mentioned. She was being rude to both the pilot in the other video and this one as well. She is now also starting to seem like she is not being safe or cautious, if not maybe even reckless.
Noticed the same thing! Completely unprofessional on her part, Southwest was just stating they never got a clearance and she gets all defensive? Huh?! She needs to be retrained.
It’s called “DEI” folks; Diversity, Equity, Inclusion.
They definitely got the “Line up and wait” from ATC.
"Unknown reasons." Only to you, Madam. 😂
The Southest crew did nothing wrong. They were cleared to line up and wait, that's what they did. The atcnever received a readback and that should have alerted her.
SW received a cross 28L and line up and wait on 28R instruction. Watching the animation with the timing of the radio transmissions SW apparently had not cleared the safety zone (250ft to each side of the runway centerline) for 28L when United initially announced their go around, and were not in position on 28R to depart when the possible takeoff clearance was blocked by the second United go around transmission. It appears that SW was doing a slow taxi for unknown reasons which affected the inbound United and Alaska flights (and technically caused 2 runway incursions).
There is blame to be apportioned to both tower ATC and SW based on how I see the information presented. ATC didn't specify that SW needed to 'expedite' or 'cross without delay' for runway 28L with addition of 'traffic on X mile final' to inform SW that there was other traffic inbound. SW needed to state that they were 'unable to comply' if they were not going to be able to cross, and line up in sufficient time, or were not ready (incomplete checklists, or configuration of aircraft).
@@CLTmech no way the animation is an accurate depiction of plane positions. its a simple "visual" for story telling purposes. there were no cameras recording these planes, distances and locations are all approximated
@@CLTmech VAS literally states at the beginning of every video that the animation may not line up with the exact position.
@@CLTmechYeah, no matter what, if you’re crossing an active runway, you don’t do a slow, lazy cross, you expedite it. Also it’s possible Southwest heard some of the takeoff clearance, and if they did, and heard what we heard, they should have at least asked tower if they were cleared to go. It could have been totally blocked tho, what we heard may not be what they heard. I feel the majority of blame is on the controller, but there may be a small part of the blame on Southwest. And for the controller to say they shouldn’t have been on the runway is just totally wrong, since she cleared them onto the runway.
Im noticing that Southwest has been the common denominator in alot of these recent incidents, interesting
0:50 the words GO AROUND were from the ASDE triggering a mandatory compliance go around instruction. Crazy to hear that in the background and it not even phase her. Hearing that in a tower will cause most controllers to shit their pants!
He'd already announced a go around with no response from the tower.
Southwest was not arguing one bit, just clarifying what he was told to do. Tower has an ego problem 100%
Is this the same woman that yelled at the Delta pilots? This woman is an embarrassment to ATC.
I was thinking the same thinh
Yup it's her.
I think the same who showed pathetic attitude to the BA 747 pilot on approach,
She needs to get off the steroids lol
female ATC are bad. But Thats diversity
After going through it again, the tower broadcast the clearance for takeoff of SWA on 28R, but it was partially blocked so SWA did not read it back. The tower was immediately distracted by a go around and didn't realize that the clearance was not read back, which lead to tower's confusion and eventually "You're not supposed to be on the runway". A challenging set of circumstances that lead to a cascading mix-up. Tower should have made sure that SWA had takeoff/taxi clearance to get off 28R before dealing with other aircraft.
SW does reply "Blocked" but even that was cut short by other transmissions.
Her clearance was blocked because another aircraft was going around because she had SW cross in front of a plane on final. She started this mess and luckily it only led to a verbal exchange when it could have ended up with a collision. If she didn't create problems she wouldn't have to fix them.
Yes, it was the pilot on the first go around who kept his mic keyed for 1.5 seconds too long, but it blocked the identifier for the SWA1159. That pilot knew it and tried to get Tower’s attention, but she wasn’t listening.
She’s the one that never got the confirmation of the takeoff clearance, so she was way wrong to tell them that they shouldn’t be on the runway.
Yes, it’s a busy class bravo frequency, but all the more reason to focus on the situation, rather than calling people out.
@@chevykid00and then promptly gave clearance for another aircraft to cross a runway in front of an aircraft that had *just* asked if they should slow down to not collide with the aircraft she had left on the runway?
This isn’t the first time this controller has gotten snippy with a flight crew on this channel. There was the issue with Delta and their take off numbers when they got switched to 28R that made it here too. Coaching is needed.
Or maybe she needs a new job
@@darrenhenderson3
If she's regularly screwing up and putting hundreds of lives at risk, then retraining is definitely required... Perhaps as a retail assistant or cat minder.
Yep!!
Coaching a female?? Courageous.
and FAA says they investigated and everything was fine?! What are they waiting for an accident before they do anything here with this controller in the tower!?
I find it quite funny that both UA277 and AS553 were both en route from IAD-SFO. They took off from the same runway in IAD almost back to back and got to SFO on Final paralleling each other.
Competition time!
bets were on at the start
Southwest did what they were supposed to do, seems to me that tower got the timing for landing aircraft wrong.
ATC error on this one.
“The last two aircraft went around. Unknown reason.”
W H A T ????? Why didn’t ATC request, “Say reason for go-around?” of the aircraft before handing them off?
The reason was the aircraft ON the runways! 🙄
The reason was that the ATC ordered an aircraft to cross one runway in order to line up and wait on another, gave take off clearance that wasn't read back, and then lost track of that aircraft. She knew she done goofed up when she made that statement.
Approach will ask them that when they go over to that frequency, and I'm sure this whole cluster got some sort of after action review.
@@jonathankleinow2073, yeah. I think ATC should have spent some time saying "Traffic on the runway instead of unknown reason". Now approach will hear "Unknown reason" after asking for reason for go-around and call tower to find out which will make more people more busy.
The aircraft was all the way at the near end of the runway. They should have just landed a little farther down.
Plainly the word(s) before "...takeoff" were blocked and 179 quickly tried to communicate that to ATC. Had the partially blocked instruction been "...cancel takeoff" and 179 rolled, she would have lost it then too. She needs a debriefing and further awareness training before calling a pilot out on frequency then telling him to pipe down. All my opinion of course
I think she needs some retraining.... Preferably something like retail.
Especially if she really is the same one who had an argument with a pilot not that long ago.
ATC lady should examine what she allowed to happen. Glad for the “go around”.
Doubt she will. From the sounds of it she has an I am always right and everyone else is always wrong mentality. Especially given the other comments about her doing this in a few other cases.
She keeps having planes cross runways when other planes are on finals. Southwest needs to make a report about this. She can cause a major accident
yeah exactly like medevac was on final and she gave clearance to cross runway 28R ....
Yes this is the same lady that had a similar issue with a delta same senario.
It's legal to do that.
@@andrewlorenzo6611 it might be legal but if you can't handle it, you shouldn't do it.
What is there to report about if it's completely legal? Where in the FAA Handbook does it say you cant have a plane on the runway when there is a plane on final?
This controller is always so argumentative. Sometimes have no idea how controllers like these keep jobs.
This is like the 2nd time she get super defensive and give attitude to the pilots right ? I’m super sure i heard her voice before
DEI hires for the fedgov NEVER get fired.
The closest I am to cockpit is when I use the forward restroom on an airliner, but this sure seemed like a controller issue to me. Maybe WN was moving slow? But he did what she told him to do and it looked like she cleared another plane to cross a runway at the end of the video with a plane close to landing.
I couldn't believe that. She did the exact same thing again! If that crossing plane was too slow there would have been a 3rd go around.
@@ZenkaiAnkoku2 If she'd just departed the Southwest off 28L behind the United instead of trying for that last bit of efficiency, or sent the aircraft already short of 28R from there, would have all been fine.
Interesting that ATC didn’t even wait for SWA’s takeoff clearance readback… Southwest not reading back their takeoff clearance would have made it obvious that they didn’t receive it…
"Line up and wait" is literally permission to be on the runway.
it's literally being told to be on the runway
@@SoloRenegade Literally
NTSB just had a hearing about runway incursion incidents earlier this week. I'm looking forward to them posting the video on here to see what conclusions they reached.
Except this was neither a runway incursion, nor a near miss. Just a controller losing situational awareness, which is fine so long as the other layers in the system don't also mess up in parallel. The number one layer is pilot awareness, and every crew did exactly the right thing at the right time.
The entire system is designed to make sure one thing cannot kill you. It takes a lot of failures for this stuff to go horribly wrong. That's why commercial air travel in the US is the safest form of travel humanity has ever designed (maybe elsewhere, too. I just know the US stats).
@@FamilyManMoving I agree, this wasn't a runway incursion by definition. But it still warrants consideration with the similar incidents we've had recently in terms of reviewing current ATC practices and the multiple layers of safety you mentioned.
@@jonathankleinow2073 Agreed, because having multiple layers doesn't mean we strip one down to its minimum, hoping the others always work. I don't get out much beyond our busy airspace (three class Bs and a buncha smaller stuff), but some days the radio sounds like a cattle auction because its so busy. And that's only TRACON. Class B approach/departure is crazy busy, too.
I think the controllers need better tools, and maybe a little more help.
This ATC really beefed it.
and not her first time messing up big doing this crap.
Instead of saying "I dont need an argument..." when she was being given info that might help; "thank you" was all that was necessary...clears the frequency faster.
She says "Okay, so you shouldn't be on the runway..." but then tells the pilot she doesn't need an argument on the frequency. Aside from the fact that she instructed them to line up and wait, she essentially started an argument on the frequency by not limiting her conversation to the next instruction.
Thank you for getting this out, Victor.
ATC was absolutely cognitively overloaded..
The way SFO funnels the departures and arrivals on those two runways, including the quick change to either makes these come up too often.
I love how she had the you are not supposed to be on the runway dig, but then when he said, correctly, he was cleared to line up and wait she became unruly.
SHE said to the SWA to line up and WAIT at 28R! And now, those pilots were wrong?!!?!??! WTF!
Is this the “you should have checked NOTAMS” controller from a couple weeks ago?
Southwest did exactly what they were told. Controller dropped the ball.
“The previous two aircraft went around, unknown reasons.”
YOU’RE THE REASON!
Cant blame her PMS
as other esteemed posters said this is the same controller from a few weeks back, she seems to enjoy having departing aircraft on the 28L side cross over to 28R and vice versa while bringing in arrivals on both runways at minimum spacing
That's usual tecnique lately at SFO
I guarantee she isn't the only controller doing this. Also do you think she controls spacing on the final? That's up to the final controller. She can make very minor adjustments such as reduce to final approach speed but besides that it's up to final.
@@VASAviation seems like a horriblem technique,...
@@andrewlorenzo6611she can refuse landing clearance and send them back around.
Wow, I was on UA 1826 that day. I had no idea of the chaos that occurred just behind us.
Please, when was it? I don’t see any date nor in the video, description or comments 🧐
May 19, 2023, for anyone curious.
Sounds like tower lost track of SA.
Or her brain. One or the other.
Tower lost track of the entire situation. Once WN started rolling across 28L triggered the first go around, but it took UA several times saying they were going around for the ATC to pick up that she had a flight "going around". By that time, WN was rolling into position on 28R, her clearance to WN was stepped on and lost in the Go Around instructions, causing WN not to get it and triggering the second Go Around with AL.
@@jackielinde7568 For unknown reasons. LOL
common theme at SFO
This close call was first reported in great detail in San Francisco Chronicle.
I am certain this controller is very good at her job. (It takes years of training and experience to become a Level One Controller in a place like SFO.)
However, I would send to London Heathrow for a couple of weeks, to learn how to listen, speak slow and calm!
Speaking like you’re announcing a cattle auction, causes blocked communications and chaos.
Should I ever need my confidence in the world restoring I find searching for BA38 ATC really helps...
given that she keeps showing up on these videos with alarming frequency, I'd say she's incompetent.
It would have been great if SWA would have come back with the: "I have a number for you to call, advise when ready to copy." 🤣 SWA was totally in the right on with this.
Thankgoodness for pilots being more aware than the ATC.
Southwest should not have been cleared to cross 28L. They had only 30 seconds after that before UAL777 announced their go around.
I just did some math based on this: 700 feet altitude of UAL777 shortly after announcing go around, 3 degree standard slide slope, approach speed somewhere around 140 knots, taxi speeds, air plane length and runway width.
Based on those numbers Southwest was cleared to taxi across 28L, when UAL777 was within 3 miles of landing there. That is way less than 90 seconds out. At taxi speed it would roughly take 20 seconds to even pass the runway. That is when already at taxi speed, not from a stand. So, Southwest was in the middle of that runway, when UAL777 was less than a minute and about 600 feet AG out. At which point any reasonable airline would make their pilots go around, I assume.
Wow, ATC is getting aggressive there. Maybe Southwest could have moved a little faster but it seemed pretty reasonable. ATC should have had them wait at 28L for those planes to come in.
😂I don't disagree, but I never thought I would read the words "Southwest could have moved a little faster" online. They have a reputation as fast movers (which is maybe why the controller messed up here, thinking that they would get themselves across 28L faster than they did)?
PMS ATC
@@Cadence-qt2ux MAGA KOG
I’m pretty sure I had this same controller set me up for a situation similar to this. Line up and wait on 28R for a Cirrus Jet to depart downfield, with an airliner on about a 4 mile final. As soon as we got the clearance, I told the PF that “this isn’t going to work out”. When it didn’t work out, the controller had to frantically ask us to expedite up to the next taxiway and exit. The Cirrus was barely over the departure end of the runway by the time the airliner touched down.
This woman is not qualified to be in that tower. I've heard here multiple times thinking other people made a mistake when it was her mistake. "line up and wait" means line up on the runway, that's what you told him to do
This controller was well behind the ball in this case. I don't know how long she has been in the business, but she needs reassignment and training before being placed back in swift thinking role.
She's getting a go-around alert that is audible in the background. Then while she is handing off UAL 277 in the 5 consecutive truncated transmission a handoff she should have been already handed the AS flight a go-around instruction if she was truly up to par here.
This really infuriates me the level of arrogant and blaming that this controller has done due to her stuff up. Personally she needs to be stood down immediately, played the tape of what she’s done wrong, write a letter of apology to the SWA pilots and get retrained again (Or just terminated from her job).
If you don’t want an argument, lady…. don’t fucking start one. “You aren’t supposed to be on the runway” is extraneous and unprofessional banter and warranted a response.
Mark the tape and sup’s number, please.
I know it’s common procedure in the US, but it boggles my mind on how you issue clearance to land when the cleared aircraft actually does not have the runway completely empty or clear.
ATC clears aircraft to land when they are no.2 on the approach. ATC clears aircraft to land when there’s people on the runway taking off. ATC clears aircraft to land when there’s someone crossing the runway.
I find that very weird. In most countries, aircraft are only cleared to land if the runway is 100% empty and no aircraft is ever gonna be on that runway from the moment one aircraft is cleared to land.
Yeah it is procedure and makes sense for US airspace and pilots flying there. But the idea of giving clearance to land to an aircraft when it’s not actually clear to land is nonsense.
Some minds can be "Boggled" quicker than others. It is called "anticipated separation", the clearance is issued, with the intention that no conflicts exist, at the time the arrival crosses the landing threshold. The controller stays focused on the rwy and the arrivals, it is a joy to use.
@@rubenvillanueva8635 Why not simply wait until the runway is 100% clear than anticipate a condition that may not reflect reality?
Simply say "continue approach, no 2 for landing". And when the runway is actually clear, a clearance is issued.
Controller is still gonna be focused on the runway, and situation awareness will be increased.
@@gabrieltassi4030 Americans defend the "cleared to land (as long as x number of things go right)" system vociferously, as if there isn't a better way to do things, usually citing busy airspace as a reason to use this system as opposed to a reason not to. To me, if this system *is* safe, the corollary would be that aircraft can be cleared for takeoff in the same way -- you're taxiing to the runway, the aircraft ahead are probably going to be fine, so go for it
I prefer the US system, especially when only one radio modulation is required to give a landing clearance, instead of two takes ("continue approach" and "cleared to land").
In busy radio environment, cutting transmissions is absolutely a plus to get things going straight.
@@gabrieltassi4030 I am only going by experience, I have used this procedure, during my career, trained others, and never had a problem. If a controller wants to wait until the aircraft clears at the end, so be it, it is his choice.
She doesn't need an argument to be exposed on VAS lol
If this is the same ATC lady who yelled at the Delta pilots it sounds like she’s in need of a vacation.
a long one, maybe even a permanent one if she can't do her job right.
Try RETRAINING.
Go around for “unknown reason” that really pissed me off
The issue was the controller expected the Southwest to taxi at “normal” southwest speeds!
*Fire that ATC. Incompetent, put many lives at risk.*
ATC should be calling a number so she can have a bit of retraining... I'm sure she will love listening and watching this video over and over a few times and realize it was HER mistake.. and to say "the last 2 aircraft went around for SOME REASON" just shows she lost control of the situation... how could she not know they went around because she left an aircraft on the runway!?!
ATC -- very full of herself. The point is not how fast and cool she can act out playing dictator, but to communicate clearly (poor diction) and support pilots (without attitude) and manage traffic (competently without jams and confusion). If traffic didn't get a message because blocked, it's her responsibility to deal with that, not preach and act like a monster. If several planes are having problems, what do they all have in common? The ATC. At least San Francisco is consistent....it seems the airport is just as bad as the number of heroin-needles on the street and the rate of violent crime in the city itself... Welcome to SF! Have a nice day!
As an armchair ATC sim:er I'm happy to see a controller doing just as poorly as me :D
Except this one is directing real aircraft. Not a comforting thought :)
I don't know that's anything to be happy to see. The difference is you're not handling real lives when you mess up as a simmer. True, the job is incredibly difficult, but one should be happy to see a professional mess up this badly where they can affect lives.
I'm looking forward to airforceproud's video of you telling him you don't need an argument on frequency
I have every confidence that I could do as shit of a job as this woman.... Which is why I don't do that job.
“2 previous arrivals went around for unknown reasons”, yet she had a fairly loud alarm in the background yelling “go around”. 🤔
So NYC had Kennedy Steve, who was amazing. And SFO has Frisco Karen, who is awful.
SWA 1179 -> SFO Tower: "Mam, when you have a moment, I have a phone number for you to take down.."
Sorry canr heatr u
This very easily could've been a repeat of what happened at Los Angeles in 1991, ATC telling a plane to line up on the runway and then forgetting about them, and then clearing another aircraft to land on the same runway. Planes couldn't see each other and a 737 landed ON TOP of a metroliner, killing 35 people.
She not only put two planes in a dangerous scenario, when called out on HER fault, she deflects and basically says "Shut up" with that "I don't need an argument". It's not an argument, you made a mistake and were called out. Correct it, don't deflect with your arrogance.
In most scenarios, arrogance makes you an asshole. In aviation, arrogance is a killer.
This sounds like the same snippy controller that got into it with a Delta plane about a month ago when they got a last minute runway change before departure and had to run some new numbers.
th-cam.com/video/XZzBTZctiAg/w-d-xo.html
I know it’s a fast paced environment but this particular controller likes to talk over other people it seems. My ex-wife was former ATC and she always talks over people. Coincidence?🤔😂
You're right, the voice sounds 100% the same. There seems to be a pattern here of not being able to handle high loads of traffic in an efficient manner, instead getting into arguments with pilots and forcing planes to go around. Maybe someone should find her a more quiet facility...
That’s because it is the same controller.
I've seen a lot of newspaper headlines saying two planes almost landed on occupied runways and close calls at SFO.
I don't think it's true there were any close calls, but definitely too close for comfort. Both United and Alaska initiated go-arounds without ATC having to tell them, even though she finally did instruct them.
The FAA has said it does not consider the incident a runway incursion.
But the ATC F'd this one up badly. She actually tells a pilot on final to caution wake from "two unknown" g-arounds. Unknown?!! Umm, you knew. (🙄)
I will say I don't understand why the first officer on the Southwest couldn't see the Alaska so close before they made the decision to continue with ATC's instruction of line up and wait.
I'd like to know more about that. But it was not a deviation.
She's (ATC) the one who needed to be given a phone number.
I simpathized with tower until the "unknown reasons". I understand making a mistake, and I also understand the "i don't want an argument on frequency" as the radio was pretty busy at that time (although SWA was right on telling the controller imho, if a communication issue occurred and the two parties' awareness of the situation diverged you really want to close that gap as soon as possible). What i don't understand is unnecessarily blocking the frequency to throw around unnecessary sass, seconds after telling a crew that they should not do so. That's just bossy behavior that has no place in ATC, especially at an airport as busy as SFO.
Regardless of how fast/slow SWA was taxing its obvious the local controller immediately lost track of them.
No traffic point outs to landing aircraft about the crossing traffic and also missed the required point out of "traffic holding in position will be departing prior to your arrival", and also the required point out of landing traffic to the airplane holding in position. All of these call-outs were added as being required for good reason--and all of them being missed points to a controller getting a little behind.
[Local controller] "You shouldn't have been on the runway"... [also local controller] "I don't need an argument on frequency"
Don't start nothing, won't be nothing.
That's just too much traffic for those two tightly spaced runways with the 1s out of service. They are just begging for loss of separation or worse.
Need crash to fire PMS Fem ATC
@@Cadence-qt2ux please go back under your bridge.
Wasn’t this the same ATC from the other SFO video?
yup
Controller screws up - twice - by putting an aircraft on both runways while others are on short final. Then gets bitchy when called out on it. Then does it AGAIN by having a 2nd aircraft cross 28R when Medivac is on short final! I hope she was disciplined for this and retrained.
The two previous arrivals for both runways went around, unknown reasons.
Said so righteously 😂
At the end of the video she instructed another crossing of 28R with the animation showing another on final... Was there a THIRD go-around?
Negative
This sounds like the same controller that scolded the pilot who didn’t setup for departure correctly and had plenty to say to that pilot but here she doesn’t want an argument. Sounds like the pilot here in this incident need to file a complaint.
Its not the same controller, I know their voices by memory, there is more than 1 female controller at SFO, this is a different one.
It's still amazes me in such a high-paced environment in radio calls coming in and out within seconds, that it is still possible that Communications are blocked
She's done a mess!...and what an arrogance! 1st she forgets to give the clearance to take off and, even better (2nd) she says that the previous 2 airplanes approaching did a "go around for unknow reasons". Maybe she forgets that she herself instructed the second one to go around. OMG!
Female PMS ATC....
I don't think she forgot. 0:53 is probably her giving the clearance. But southwest did not hear it and thus did not takeoff.
ATC cleared Southwest as they said. ATC issue. Interesting to hear what seemed like an automatic system in the background saying "go around"
Im not a pilot but I'm learning to become one, wasn't that a bit close at the end for Jetspeed 641 to be crossing 28R with 6PH that close to landing on 28R?
Controller needs to be fired. Too much of this happening, and she doesn't even know why it happened.... She's completely clueless
Towers fault 100%, maybe SWA taxied slower than they thought (which is surprising) but tower lost track of them physically and comms wise… we all have to focus at the job but the ball was dropped very hard, “you shouldn’t be on the runway then”, where do you think they came from?! They just appeared out there? Shows SA was totally lost
Cant blame female PMS
0:54 Is her telling them to takoff. In her mind they were all ready taking off. But 1:04 shows that transmission did not arrive.
It's one of those moments, where I need the pilot saying to the controller. "I have a phonenumber for you to copy."
This situation is approaching crazy. If this is in real time, then that’s too much radio traffic. This kind of situation was bound to happen.
I flew out of a small Delta airport with parallel runways and even they had separate controllers for the parallel runways. seems SFO should do the same to keep traffic chatter down to manageable levels.
I really don't/didn't hear an argument. What I think we're hearing is the pilot making sure it's included in any recording that he was where he was suppose to be.
Can someone more familiar with SFO explain to me why ATC is unwilling to position aircraft *between* the two parallel runways? Only the largest of planes would have trouble fitting into that space. They seem to enjoy giving pilots a "Cross what's right in front of you and line up & wait on the other runway" instruction. If they aren't going to request no delay, any inbounds better be at least 10 miles out.
"Just head way the hell over there and go sit on the active" might be a safe operation for an airport that sees five landings per hour, not San Franfuckingcisco.
"runways 28 left and Right are too close together... closer than the standard, required spacing for parallel runways" "FAA-waived runway separation"
There should be more personal for this workload and more late clearances. SFO is a hell (all 4 runways may be active at the same time)
Why is taxiway B this way? If you "follow" B and miss the turn (onto B) you are on F or J. Why there some hold shorts sign's only on one side (or on the wrong side) of the taxiway? And what's with taxiway T.
SWA was cleared to line up and wait, yes, but you can't accept a clearance if you know you're going to proceed into a traffic conflict. I was always taught that, regardless of any clearance, you have to watch crossing active runways. The first consideration is landing traffic when crossing or proceeding onto an active runway. Part of the problem, here, may be the space between the right and left runways, but SWA was clearly lingering at the threshold of 28L when there was landing traffic on short final. then, when they occupied 28R there was more traffic on short final... If there's no space to stop between 28L and 28R then there's probably not much SWA could do, but it's super important to consider landing traffic before accepting any clearance to cross or taxi onto any active runway.
"Unknown reasons"? Perhaps the aircraft ATC send over the runways has sth to do with it...
That woman needs firing if she's unable to tell why 2 aircraft went around after she told off another aircraft for being on the runway.
Did anyone give her a number to call???
Yikes, that controller is a real piece of work.