Narrative:

As you well know, the visuals (quiet bridge runway 28R and tipp toe runway 28L) to sfo are operationally unacceptable. There is certain to be a midair collision at some point. Having flown into nearly every commercial airport in the us more than 3 times, I feel qualified to make that statement. I've flown both runway 28L and 28R visuals. The main consideration is aircraft are kept high for runway 28L then told to descend and intercept runway 28L. With lots of altitude to lose the necessary speed reduction cannot be made, so the turn radius puts their aircraft north of the runway 28R localizer. All this while runway 28R quiet bridge arrs must turn left and intercept the runway 28R localizer from the san mateo bridge. This is the recipe for a disaster. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter restated his concerns as written in the narrative portion of his report. He wanted to know if NASA/ASRS could help his cause. The NASA/ASRS program was explained to him. He understood NASA/ASRS's role. He was advised to pursue his concerns with his airline management. He stated that he had filed a report with his company. We discussed the pros and cons of the procedures.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT WAS CONCERNED ABOUT ANOTHER ACFT FLYING ALONG SIDE OF HIS ACFT DURING VISUAL WX CONDITIONS.

Narrative: AS YOU WELL KNOW, THE VISUALS (QUIET BRIDGE RWY 28R AND TIPP TOE RWY 28L) TO SFO ARE OPERATIONALLY UNACCEPTABLE. THERE IS CERTAIN TO BE A MIDAIR COLLISION AT SOME POINT. HAVING FLOWN INTO NEARLY EVERY COMMERCIAL ARPT IN THE U.S. MORE THAN 3 TIMES, I FEEL QUALIFIED TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT. I'VE FLOWN BOTH RWY 28L AND 28R VISUALS. THE MAIN CONSIDERATION IS ACFT ARE KEPT HIGH FOR RWY 28L THEN TOLD TO DSND AND INTERCEPT RWY 28L. WITH LOTS OF ALT TO LOSE THE NECESSARY SPD REDUCTION CANNOT BE MADE, SO THE TURN RADIUS PUTS THEIR ACFT N OF THE RWY 28R LOC. ALL THIS WHILE RWY 28R QUIET BRIDGE ARRS MUST TURN LEFT AND INTERCEPT THE RWY 28R LOC FROM THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE. THIS IS THE RECIPE FOR A DISASTER. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR RESTATED HIS CONCERNS AS WRITTEN IN THE NARRATIVE PORTION OF HIS RPT. HE WANTED TO KNOW IF NASA/ASRS COULD HELP HIS CAUSE. THE NASA/ASRS PROGRAM WAS EXPLAINED TO HIM. HE UNDERSTOOD NASA/ASRS'S ROLE. HE WAS ADVISED TO PURSUE HIS CONCERNS WITH HIS AIRLINE MGMNT. HE STATED THAT HE HAD FILED A RPT WITH HIS COMPANY. WE DISCUSSED THE PROS AND CONS OF THE PROCS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.