Narrative:

Sfo approach control issued us a visual approach to runway 28R at sfo to maintain 180 KTS to the marker (approximately 5 mi from threshold). 'Traffic at 9 O'clock, air carrier large transport in a left hand turn into 28L has you in sight maintaining visual,' was issued also by approach control. Approach control told us to contact the tower at the marker. When we called the tower they told us 'traffic ahead an small transport, slow to final approach speed, you're 50 KTS faster, s-turns to the north only.' we s-turned and slowed. When we rejoined the runway 28R final the air carrier large transport had gained on us and was on final to runway 28L. Horizontal sep was at a minimum. They were only slightly ahead and about 200-300' off the left. It was obvious approach control and tower were not communicating their intentions to each other. It seemed the tower operator had no clue as to how long it takes to slow 50 KTS and configure properly. Also, it is inexcusable for sep to be reduced as it was. Had the winds been greater, or had the air carrier or us overflown the course, there could have been a serious conflict. I strongly feel they (sfo) are placing too many airplanes into minimum sep situations and not allowing for aircraft to slow, maneuver and configure. If they do maneuver aircraft this way, at least the approach controller and local controller should have an idea what each other required.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR WDB FLT CREW COMPLAINT ABOUT SEPARATION WHILE ON A TIPTOE VISUAL APCH INTO SFO.

Narrative: SFO APCH CTL ISSUED US A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 28R AT SFO TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS TO THE MARKER (APPROX 5 MI FROM THRESHOLD). 'TFC AT 9 O'CLOCK, ACR LGT IN A LEFT HAND TURN INTO 28L HAS YOU IN SIGHT MAINTAINING VISUAL,' WAS ISSUED ALSO BY APCH CTL. APCH CTL TOLD US TO CONTACT THE TWR AT THE MARKER. WHEN WE CALLED THE TWR THEY TOLD US 'TFC AHEAD AN SMT, SLOW TO FINAL APCH SPD, YOU'RE 50 KTS FASTER, S-TURNS TO THE N ONLY.' WE S-TURNED AND SLOWED. WHEN WE REJOINED THE RWY 28R FINAL THE ACR LGT HAD GAINED ON US AND WAS ON FINAL TO RWY 28L. HORIZ SEP WAS AT A MINIMUM. THEY WERE ONLY SLIGHTLY AHEAD AND ABOUT 200-300' OFF THE LEFT. IT WAS OBVIOUS APCH CTL AND TWR WERE NOT COMMUNICATING THEIR INTENTIONS TO EACH OTHER. IT SEEMED THE TWR OPERATOR HAD NO CLUE AS TO HOW LONG IT TAKES TO SLOW 50 KTS AND CONFIGURE PROPERLY. ALSO, IT IS INEXCUSABLE FOR SEP TO BE REDUCED AS IT WAS. HAD THE WINDS BEEN GREATER, OR HAD THE ACR OR US OVERFLOWN THE COURSE, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A SERIOUS CONFLICT. I STRONGLY FEEL THEY (SFO) ARE PLACING TOO MANY AIRPLANES INTO MINIMUM SEP SITUATIONS AND NOT ALLOWING FOR ACFT TO SLOW, MANEUVER AND CONFIGURE. IF THEY DO MANEUVER ACFT THIS WAY, AT LEAST THE APCH CTLR AND LCL CTLR SHOULD HAVE AN IDEA WHAT EACH OTHER REQUIRED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.