On return vector after missed approach to sfo; flight crew experienced late runway change.

Attributes
ACN	725044
Time
Date	200701
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sfo.airport
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl single value : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : nct.tracon tower : cle.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 28r
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : missed approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 220 flight time total : 500 flight time type : 500
ASRS Report	725044
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : executed missed approach
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Airport Airspace Structure Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

On missed approach; norcal said to expect runway 28L. On downwind 4000 ft 180 knots switched second controller -- given turn to 310 to intercept runway 28R; descent to 3000 ft. We had to scramble to configure and switch runways. We were 1 and a half dots high for runway 28L. 3 thoughts 1) why lack of coordination between controllers? 2) no idea of sequence -- lots of aircraft in area. 3) gca box pattern very tight. Given sfo is in top 5 for unstabilized apches (we weren't) we would like better handling and coordination.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ON RETURN VECTOR AFTER MISSED APCH TO SFO; FLT CREW EXPERIENCED LATE RWY CHANGE.

Narrative: ON MISSED APCH; NORCAL SAID TO EXPECT RWY 28L. ON DOWNWIND 4000 FT 180 KNOTS SWITCHED SECOND CTLR -- GIVEN TURN TO 310 TO INTERCEPT RWY 28R; DSCNT TO 3000 FT. WE HAD TO SCRAMBLE TO CONFIGURE AND SWITCH RWYS. WE WERE 1 AND A HALF DOTS HIGH FOR RWY 28L. 3 THOUGHTS 1) WHY LACK OF COORDINATION BETWEEN CTLRS? 2) NO IDEA OF SEQUENCE -- LOTS OF ACFT IN AREA. 3) GCA BOX PATTERN VERY TIGHT. GIVEN SFO IS IN TOP 5 FOR UNSTABILIZED APCHES (WE WEREN'T) WE WOULD LIKE BETTER HANDLING AND COORDINATION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.