Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:42 pm

I assume this violates FAA separation rules? Isn't it 1 mile separation minimum? Those runways are 743 feet apart centerline to centerline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEE35V5m98Y
 
wn676
Posts: 1751
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:46 pm

Perfectly legal under visual conditions. You can find plenty of pictures in the database. They also depart off the 1s like this fairly often.
Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:50 pm

I'm shocked, I thought there was a diagonal distance required even for VFR. That's nuts. I've never seen it that close myself and I fly a lot.
 
9V-SPJ
Posts: 671
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 1:51 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:57 pm

Flights at SFO landing on the 28s on visual conditions typically use the Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA) to allow for better use of the 28s. I don't think I have seen them almost parallel to each other in quite a while as they are in the video... I think the SOIA approach requires the flights to be staggered?

9V-SPJ
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:52 am

I hate to cry safety, but I don't think two passenger planes flying 750 feet apart at 150-200 mph is safe.
 
User avatar
hufftheweevil
Posts: 785
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 1:08 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:02 am

enilria wrote:
I hate to cry safety, but I don't think two passenger planes flying 750 feet apart at 150-200 mph is safe.


Any less safe than two passenger vehicles flying down the road less than 8 feet apart at 60-70mph?
Huff
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5081
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:05 am

Once they are cleared for visual and have each other in sight they can start doing figure 8s for all the tower cares.
 
User avatar
Vasu
Posts: 3170
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:34 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:10 am

... it's a very interesting video though!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:13 am

It is very VERY common at SFO landing on the 28s, which is the most ideal configuration.

I usually make an announcement to warn the passengers, as it can be rather startling if never seen before.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
rickabone
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:14 am

Perfectly safe and perfectly legal. That's what visual separation is all about. Some pilots are uncomfortable with it, some love it. As a controller at SFO, the closer they are to parallel the better because that gives us more of a hole to get the Rwy 01L/R departures out. This is our preferred approach and we will use it so long as we have ceilings above 4000', good visibility and favorable wind conditions.

SOIA would be the next preference but it does require a bit of a stagger. We can run SOIA with ceilings as low as 1600'.

Next we have CSP or .308 approaches. They can be run down to CAT 1 minimums but require a 1.5 mile stagger between the leading aircraft on RWY 28L to the trailing aircraft on RWY 28R.

"Sideby's" give us the best arrival rate, followed by SOIA and then CSP.

As far as the video goes, that looks like a perfectly executed sideby approach by all parties involved. Northern California Tracon, the pilots and SFO tower. That is exactly how we want it to be done.

And yes, the planes are going anywhere from 130-200 knots and they are only about ~700 feet apart (remember the runways are 750 feet apart centerline to centerline so wingtip to wingtip is even closer), their relative speed to each other is minimal as they are flying in the same direction afterall. It's basically like formation flight. You set one aircraft up on the approach and you have the other aircraft get visual when still under standard IFR separation rules (usually using 1000' of altitude). Then you put it on the pilot of the trailing aircraft to continue to maintain visual separation and descend while controlling their speed to achieve the sideby result. It's a beautiful thing when it works this well.
 
BlatantEcho
Posts: 2132
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2000 10:11 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:20 am

Yeah, I don't get how this video is surprising to any aviation fan.

It's completely normal for SFO in every way.

no need to start a thread to cry wolf for zero reason without any facts. Irresponsible almost.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1974
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:23 am

As mentioned this is nothing new for SFO. However it was also commonplace at several other US airports with dependent parallel runways. Places such as EWR, BOS, DFW, and LAX:

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Grumman-G-1159-Gulfstream-II-TT/150311

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Shuttle-by-United-%28United-Airlines%29/Boeing-737-522/25176

But it doesn't seem as common at these other airports as it used to. Anyone know why?

Does anyone know how to imbed photos from the A.net database into a thread?
FLYi
 
airnorth
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 6:03 am

[quote="rickabone"]Perfectly safe and perfectly legal. That's what visual separation is all about. Some pilots are uncomfortable with it, some love it. As a controller at SFO, the closer they are to parallel the better because that gives us more of a hole to get the Rwy 01L/R departures out.

Thanks for the great response, I really learned something on this thread!
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8633
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 6:34 am

Now imagine if OZ214 had had a double on that day!
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
User avatar
BartSimpson
Posts: 634
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 5:01 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 7:51 am

rickabone wrote:
Perfectly safe and perfectly legal. That's what visual separation is all about. Some pilots are uncomfortable with it, some love it. As a controller at SFO, the closer they are to parallel the better because that gives us more of a hole to get the Rwy 01L/R departures out. This is our preferred approach...


Thanks Rickabone for the interesting insight!

One question though: is is somehow related to the aircraft type - say, you wouldn't prefer that with a B737 / A380 combo?
 
User avatar
ro1960
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:19 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:33 am

It's very common at SFO and I have experienced it many times, landing and taking off.

I think it's safer than simultaneous landings on intersecting runways! See this thread:

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=776439

Image
Do not compensate for the lack of skills with a surplus of opinion.
 
User avatar
ro1960
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:19 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:36 am

Parallel take-offs are cool too!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEc-fsdeBgk
Do not compensate for the lack of skills with a surplus of opinion.
 
User avatar
SFOA380
Posts: 579
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:33 pm

It's even cooler and more dramatic when two jumbos land simultaneously. It's also cool to witness the reactions of other passengers as a 747 drops in to view unexpectedly while landing.
 
iahcsr
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:35 pm

The big problem with SFO is when they don't have clear skies... That when flights have to be majorly staggered on approach. This reduces the arrival rate and aircraft have to be held, sometimes for hours, at their departure point. With current technology the only way to solve this problem is to build a new runway or two out in the bay... And the treehuggers in SFO will never permit that.
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 5:33 pm

iahcsr wrote:
The big problem with SFO is when they don't have clear skies... That when flights have to be majorly staggered on approach. This reduces the arrival rate and aircraft have to be held, sometimes for hours, at their departure point. With current technology the only way to solve this problem is to build a new runway or two out in the bay... And the treehuggers in SFO will never permit that.


It is not only treehuggers that care about the environment. And SFO is more limited by OAK across the bay. Where would you put the runway? You could extend the 1's so more heavies can take off from there but most people would not agree the pollution and other effects are worth it.
 
timz
Posts: 6580
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing

Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:26 pm

9V-SPJ wrote:
Flights at SFO landing on the 28s on visual conditions typically use the Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA) to allow for better use of the 28s
What's better about that use of the 28s?

Last I looked, the actual rule doesn't allow simultaneous ops when the runway edges are less than 600 ft apart-- so never have understood how SFO is legal.

Presumably airliners never land side by side at SNA, with runway centerlines 500 ft apart-- but do airliners land alongside Cessnas?
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22026
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:42 pm

rickabone wrote:
It's a beautiful thing when it works this well.


And when it doesn't, we wind up with a ball of fire and aluminum. Happens 2-3x/day at SFO. ;) (Kidding, of course)

No, seriously, if this were that unsafe, then why has SFO never, AFAIK, had two aircraft on parallel approach crash into each-other? It's safe because the pilots can see the other aircraft, because they are on their respective glideslopes, and because they have their procedures at the ready if one of them has to go around so that they'll turn away from the other aircraft and not towards it. I've lost count of the number of times I've been aboard aircraft doing this approach and it is SO cool from a passenger perspective. The other airplane doesn't even look that close. Best I ever experienced was landing next to a LH 744 from a UA 752.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
iahcsr
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:49 am

b747400erf wrote:
iahcsr wrote:
The big problem with SFO is when they don't have clear skies... That when flights have to be majorly staggered on approach. This reduces the arrival rate and aircraft have to be held, sometimes for hours, at their departure point. With current technology the only way to solve this problem is to build a new runway or two out in the bay... And the treehuggers in SFO will never permit that.


It is not only treehuggers that care about the environment. And SFO is more limited by OAK across the bay. Where would you put the runway? You could extend the 1's so more heavies can take off from there but most people would not agree the pollution and other effects are worth it.


A new runway(s) could only happen by landfill in the bay obviously... And that is what will never be permitted to occur. I don't see this as a bad thing... Just a limitation.
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
 
rickabone
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 1:07 am

BartSimpson wrote:
rickabone wrote:
One question though: is is somehow related to the aircraft type - say, you wouldn't prefer that with a B737 / A380 combo?

IF wake turbulence is an issue then the larger (wake category) aircraft cannot pass the smaller. They can get right next to each other and the smaller is allowed to pass the larger. At SFO we just went through "Wake ReCat" that established new wake turbulence aircraft categories and rules we need to follow but that is the general rule.
 
rickabone
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 1:19 am

iahcsr wrote:
With current technology the only way to solve this problem is to build a new runway or two out in the bay...

With current technology that is true, but we are very close to new technology that will allow properly equipped aircraft to fly parallel, sideby approaches down to CAT 1 minimums. They are working on 'paired approaches.' Where the planes will basically 'talk' to each other. There will be a lead aircraft and the trailing aircraft will display airspeed, altitude and course guidance on the pilot's PFD that will allow them to pair up with the other aircraft even in IMC. This has been tested and has worked well in simulations but there is still a lot of actual flight testing that needs to be done before it can be approved and certified.

A few of my coworkers participated in the simulations on the controller side of things and seemed pretty optimistic about it becoming a reality, albeit in about 5 or more years.

https://www.mitre.org/sites/default/fil ... paired.pdf
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp. ... er=5935382
 
portcolumbus
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:10 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 1:28 am

LAS runs simul visuals to 01L/01R when the wind is strong out of the northeast. They're roughly 800' apart.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22026
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:28 am

iahcsr wrote:
A new runway(s) could only happen by landfill in the bay obviously... And that is what will never be permitted to occur. I don't see this as a bad thing... Just a limitation.


I view it as a bad thing. SFO needs new runways or SOME system to allow continued operations when it's a little cloudy without an automatic 3-hour delay. As it is, I try to avoid SFO whenever I can, especially during the winter. OAK with its single runway is much more reliable. There was a proposal to build huge, floating runways out in the Bay, but nothing like that has ever been done before and I don't see how it could be made sufficiently bouyant that a fully-loaded A380 won't make it dip. Perhaps heavier aircraft could use the current runways and aircraft smaller than an A321 can use the floaters. But that's not likely, either.

There was the time I was flying back from SBA but the flight got delayed six hours. Had I known at the time it was announced that the delay would be that long, I would have asked them to refund my return leg, marched right over to the rental car counter, and rented a car to dead-head back home (and still I would have beaten my flight). But in typical airline fashion, it was an hour and half advisory, and then another hour and a half, and then another half hour, and so-on. Got home at 2AM and had to work the next day.

So my solution is to fly out of OAK when I can and when I can't, I try to make sure I can get into an airline lounge.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing

Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:41 am

timz wrote:
9V-SPJ wrote:

Presumably airliners never land side by side at SNA, with runway centerlines 500 ft apart-- but do airliners land alongside Cessnas?



At SNA cessnas do land side by side, and take-off side by side with airliners in visual conditions. The approach and departure leg to 20L and 2R are offset by 15 degrees to the east. As far as I can tell, it's never planned but with the speed differences between aircraft and running two independent runways sometimes it happens that way.

FYI @SNA the runway centerlines are 525 feet apart, and anything larger than a 737-800 will block a runway from use when holding in-between the runways. There are no insturment approaches to the small runway, so the small runway is of limited use below 1000 feet ceiling, unusable as a runway below 500 feet celling.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 5:24 am

flyPIT wrote:
As mentioned this is nothing new for SFO. However it was also commonplace at several other US airports with dependent parallel runways. Places such as EWR, BOS, DFW, and LAX:

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Grumman-G-1159-Gulfstream-II-TT/150311

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Shuttle-by-United-%28United-Airlines%29/Boeing-737-522/25176

But it doesn't seem as common at these other airports as it used to. Anyone know why?

Does anyone know how to imbed photos from the A.net database into a thread?


Back in the 90s DFW used to do this a lot, especially the morning arrivals. It was an awesome site looking back after landing and seeing rows of landing lights four wide. With the new runway on the east side, they do do not do this anymore.
 
Passedv1
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:40 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:49 am

The part that is on the video is actually the mundane part of the operation. The "action", if any, takes place out over MENLO when the airplanes initially join up. The part on the video is no big deal, the speeds are already locked in and both airplanes are in final configuration. I'm not sure what legal separation standards you are speaking of. Both airplanes are on a visual approach with usually both, but definitely the in-trail aircraft maintaining separation. Taxing at LAX is more nerve racking then visuals into SFO. These are big airplanes, much of what you are seeing is an illusion. There is plenty of distance between the two airplanes.
 
uta999
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:44 am

This would never happen in the UK.

How did they both join final at almost the same time and altitude?

What about a burst tyre on landing, a go around of one or both aircraft (vortex), or a crash similar to the Korean 777, where the plane inverted and landed between the parallels.
Your computer just got better
 
tp1040
Posts: 370
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:55 pm

uta999 wrote:
This would never happen in the UK.

How did they both join final at almost the same time and altitude?

What about a burst tyre on landing, a go around of one or both aircraft (vortex), or a crash similar to the Korean 777, where the plane inverted and landed between the parallels.


I guess that Delta 737, that is waiting to cross, had better be lucky.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2746
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:49 pm

uta999 wrote:
This would never happen in the UK.

How did they both join final at almost the same time and altitude?

What about a burst tyre on landing, a go around of one or both aircraft (vortex), or a crash similar to the Korean 777, where the plane inverted and landed between the parallels.


They wound up at the same altitude and on close parallel approaches because ATC put them there and the pilots are willing to maintain visual separation. Believe it or not, when I fly into SFO on a visual I'm trying to be as close to abeam the other aircraft as possible as I know it helps tower get departures out.

As to your other questions, a tire burst would be just as bad as any other airport with aircraft taxiing in proximity of runways. Go a rounds have published procedures so the aircraft don't conflict, when it comes to wake turbulence being abeam is better than one aircraft being in trail, and the Asiana accident was again something that could have been worse at any airport where aircraft hold short of the runway near the threshold (so nearly every airport where the same runway is used for departures and arrivals).
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
rcair1
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 3:56 pm

rickabone wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:
rickabone wrote:
One question though: is is somehow related to the aircraft type - say, you wouldn't prefer that with a B737 / A380 combo?

IF wake turbulence is an issue then the larger (wake category) aircraft cannot pass the smaller. They can get right next to each other and the smaller is allowed to pass the larger. At SFO we just went through "Wake ReCat" that established new wake turbulence aircraft categories and rules we need to follow but that is the general rule.


Wake turbulence will not be an issue in parallel approaches because it is behind (and typically below) the leading aircraft. If they are, basically, side by side, you will not encounter it.
rcair1
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11206
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:06 pm

rcair1 wrote:
rickabone wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:

IF wake turbulence is an issue then the larger (wake category) aircraft cannot pass the smaller. They can get right next to each other and the smaller is allowed to pass the larger. At SFO we just went through "Wake ReCat" that established new wake turbulence aircraft categories and rules we need to follow but that is the general rule.


Wake turbulence will not be an issue in parallel approaches because it is behind (and typically below) the leading aircraft. If they are, basically, side by side, you will not encounter it.

Yes, when they are side by side. It can become an issue if the larger wake category is ahead of the smaller one, however, which is why they are not allowed to pass as he said.
 
rickabone
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:27 am

rcair1 wrote:
rickabone wrote:
BartSimpson wrote:

IF wake turbulence is an issue then the larger (wake category) aircraft cannot pass the smaller. They can get right next to each other and the smaller is allowed to pass the larger. At SFO we just went through "Wake ReCat" that established new wake turbulence aircraft categories and rules we need to follow but that is the general rule.


Wake turbulence will not be an issue in parallel approaches because it is behind (and typically below) the leading aircraft. If they are, basically, side by side, you will not encounter it.


It also depends on the winds. A quartering tailwind can and has put the wake from one of the parallels right into the flight path for the other parallel. But even when physics says it won't be an issue, the rules are drawn up much more conservatively and that is what I was referring to.
 
rickabone
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:35 am

uta999 wrote:
This would never happen in the UK.

How did they both join final at almost the same time and altitude?

What about a burst tyre on landing, a go around of one or both aircraft (vortex), or a crash similar to the Korean 777, where the plane inverted and landed between the parallels.


IF that is true then perhaps the UK could learn a thing or two about moving some metal ;)

Seriously though, it doesn't happen that they both JOIN final "at almost the same time and altitude." In this video you are seeing them when they are already ESTABLISHED on final. They join final much further out and the procedure is that one aircraft will set up on final, while the aircraft for the parallel is still legally IFR separated (usually using altitude here at 1000' above the other aircraft that is more or less established on final). The controllers at NCT will get the pilot to see the aircraft that is established on final (in front of and below them), and then will tell them to maintain visual separation with that other aircraft. At that point it is on the pilots to keep the planes apart and they can get as close as they feel comfortable with short of actually trading paint. NCT will then allow that aircraft to descend and will control their speed in such a manner as to get the aircraft paired up with the one that was already established usually by the time they reach about a 5 mile final. This is why we need at least a 4000 foot ceiling to make sideby arrivals work at SFO. That's the normal technique we see but there are a few other ways to make it happen as well.
 
timz
Posts: 6580
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

Re: SNA Simultaneous Landing

Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:34 pm

Web500sjc wrote:
@SNA the runway centerlines are 525 feet apart
If you go out and measure them, I'll bet they turn out to be 500 or 501 ft.

The rule seems to say simult ops aren't legal when either aircraft is a jet airliner and runways centerlines are less than 700 ft apart, and SNA is for sure less than that. Never have seen why simult ops are legal there, if they are.
 
divemaster08
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:45 pm

Re: SFO Simultaneous Landing (2x UA), 800 Feet Apart!

Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:11 pm

ICAO Reduced Separation around the vicinity of the aerodrome in use (or the FAA equivalent):

Both aircraft have each other in sight and will remain visually separated,

The succeeding aircraft has the proceeding aircraft in sight, maintain visual separation,

Controller has both in sight (and can monitor them)

Obviously looks very unsafe, but is actually better to be alongside him than behind him, avoid less wake turb if alongside (or possibility of W/T). Pilots have the final say in the safety of their aircraft also, so it seems that these 2 guys are comfortable with this idea of an approach (and probably love the thrill of it to!)
My dream, is to fly, over the rainbow, so high!

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos