SFO Close Call: ATC Clears United 737 To Cross Runway, As Planes Take Off

Despite the correct read back, the proper procedure in the US is for ATC to never give a clearance to cross 2 runways at the same time, even if a runway is closed. A clearance is issued to cross one runway, hold short of the next runway, then clear an aircraft to cross the next runway once clear of the first runway. Luckily disaster was avoided here.

Greedy obsolete JoeAmateur and colleagues refusing to be extinct will eventually costs lives. But they still want a raise.

It's just a matter of when.

There is no reason why these types of communications cannot be automated and transmitted electronically - even if also by voice - and run through computers to check for conflicts - other than that the global ATC system is hopelessly stuck in the past.

These types of incidents are the largest source of potential accidents.

That is the standard, however SFO has an exception where they are allowed to clear aircraft across 2 runways at once. It's very much the norm there. I'm sure events like this cause them to reevaluate this policy.

SFO also has an independent automated runway status light system that illuminates red lights at taxiway crossings whenever an aircraft is taking off or landing, as well as red lights on the runway whenever anything is deter crossing downfield.

Proof that Trump is at fault and that socialism is better. Wouldn't have happened if AOC were president.

You are proof why lucky needs to stop the guest commenting.
Your post has nothing to do with this topic.

Respectfully, you are completely wrong on this. Ground instructions are not the largest source of potential accidents. Pilot error is.

Flight simulator developers can’t even get video game automated atc to work properly, even with ai. If I wouldn’t trust automation to be ATC for my video game, there’s no way I’d trust it with my actual life

pilot error is the cause of ACTUAL accidents.

There are indeed more close calls on the ground because of failed radio communications.

When will secretary Duffy act on the ATC manpower shortages? Rehire retirees, temporarily reassign military controllers, e.g.

I get nervous as a passenger looking out the window and looking on my phone with flight radar24 when I see we have to cross several runways.

Every time I look at the map from one of these incidents, it seems that there is really no need to have aircraft crossing active runways.
Presumably SFO never had crossing runways active at the same time - so this was part of a changover from one pair of runways to another.
Then why not just wait the extra 2 minutes to allow the old ones to clear before going to the new ones?

What SFO has independent "automated" runway status light system.

But dinosaurs here all hate automation.

The 28s and 1s are almost always used simultaneously - 1s for narrowbody takeoffs, 28s for landings and widebody takeoffs. There was no "changeover" going on.

@Speedbird

We must be paying a completely different flight sim.

You must have mistaken it for GTA.

The correct answer is fully automated it and remove all humans forever.

This

and the first step is to send it by text message in addition to the current voice system.

I didn't tell you to trust AI w/ your life.

I said to start w/ creating a text duplication to the current voice process.

It is incredible that we send critical information via voice that is not only secure but is fraught w/ potential for misinterpretation.

This is the case 90% of the time. The peninsula is set up so that there's almost always wind coming from the west. When the wind is really strong, they don't take off from the ones. If landing and longhauls aren't on the 28s, then it's raining.
Also, SFO is the busiest US airport with a single tower frequency/controller. With the layout, it can't be otherwise: two sets of parallel runways close together (they wouldn't build that distance between the parallels today), intersecting. Everyone needs to be on frequency, for just that reason.
The controller failed. That happens, but we'd like to minimize it happening. The system had additional redundancy built in: stop bars, two sets of pilots. The system didn't come close to failing.

I don’t feel bad for the controller at all. If he can’t handle the workload, he should tell his employer he needs a break or quit his job. Shouldn’t risk the lives of hundreds of people. Absolutely ludicrous

When I was a controller at SFO during busy times there were two data men, who were fully qualified, that listened to the Local Controller and assisted to prevent situations such as this. However, we did have our incidents.

You don't know anything about ground control. Go ride your tricycle.

Me: 20+ year career passenger airline flying into/out of SFO including being based there for most of it. This controller did not have "obvious fatigue" and things like this happened in the past in SFO, LAX, SEA, PHX, etc. Fortunately it did not happen often, but it did happen. The difference is back then, the public couldn't access the ATC ground radar and communication tapes to find out so immediately and easily.

Any pilot familiar with SFO operations will recognize that this controller was "in the flow" with the dance of "two landings / two departures / repeat" as he is clearing landings on 28L/R, departures on 1L/R, managing 1L/R crossings (which happens while aircraft are landing on 28, to maximize efficiency and safety), and 28L crossings for aircraft that land 28R. He was actually doing quite nicely, didn't sound stressed nor rushed, and there were several pauses in time in the tape which shows me he was not at "max level" in the number of aircraft he was handling. But he just made a simple error.

Hawaii flights nearly always use 28L/R for departures. These flights are sometimes crossed on both 1L/1R (at "F") in one instruction if landing traffic on the 28s momentarily block 1L/1R departures anyhow. However, if there is departure traffic on only 1R (as in this case) the controller will give the "Cross 1L, hold short 1R" instruction to position the crossing aircraft as near to 1R as is safely possible - to minimize the length of time it takes to cross, and not interrupt the "two landings / two departures" flow that makes the airport run efficiently.

The controllers repeat these instructions hundreds of times a week, over and over. He did simply think he gave the "hold short" for 1R when he obviously didn't. And he didn't catch the readback with the permission to cross both runways by the pilots. So, one of the safety links failed (an careful, correct ATC instruction with confirmation the pilot understood it via the readback).

Fortunately, two other systems didn't fail - the pilots being situationally aware of the departures - and NOT crossing 1R (they likely heard the "flight (xxx) cleared for takeoff, 1R" and caught the conflict). The other system that didn't fail was the Runway Status Lights (installed for 1L/1R on taxiway F) which would have illuminated upon detecting the moving departures on 1R (for commenters advocating for an automation-based solution, this is one in use already). These lights monitor takeoffs and landings, and illuminate red to indicate pilots should not proceed, even if they have a verbal instruction to do so. They are not turned on manually, and many airports have them installed where runway incursions were more likely. They're light a red light version of a crossing guard.

To sum up: This issue actually happens more than most realize, but fortunately it happens infrequently. But it does happen. And as in this case, a set of experienced pilots caught an ATC error - just like the SFO ATC controllers have caught pilot errors (look up Air Canada lining up to land on a taxiway in SFO after a long duty day around midnight as an example). That's the way the system works. It's impossible for everything to be perfect, but having multiple layers involved allows one to cover for the other when mistakes do happen.

It's obviously just a troll comment. It's actually quiet clever and amusing, though.

Another clever troll. At least you guys give us a few chuckles.

You don't know anything about technology.

tricycle?
You're still suggesting a human powered vehicle? How rudimentary.
We have hover boards.
Where we're going, we don't need roads

Eskimo continues his trolling rampage... he DGAF about lives, he GAF about talking shit about other people.

Case in point--- there is literally no company or government that has put forward a system/proposal to replace ATC. But instead of advocating for the best possible conditions for the people who keep him safe
(until such time they finally can be replaced), he shits on them by calling them greedy, obsolete dinosaurs.

It's kinda weird that he flies at all for all his **alleged** concern.

Anyway, I'll never compromise on safety, but when the public rages against the people responsible for their safety-- and doesn't want them to be fairly compensated, they are unwittingly adding a level of stress to those controllers. Ironically, the kind of tirade Eskimo is on about regarding ATC--- well, THAT could cost lives.

But, to repeat my initial statement--- he doesn't **actually** care about lives. So dollars to donuts you'll see him here again with his fake "replace them all" sentiment.

Also--- "Refusing to be extinct" --- that's... not a thing.

That's not actually correct. There are exceptions. Besides SFO, MDW they cross you multiple 31s at one time, but the 22's are too far apart from each other so they don't . Less than 1300 between each centerline is the standard where multiple crossings are permitted. Facility must get specific approval to do so.

Whether is smart to do is another question

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap3_section_7.html#:~:text=An%20aircraft%20must%20have%20crossed,issued%20with%20a%20single%20clearance.

"You can't help but feel bad for him" wtf is that kind of comment??. He about killed 300 people.