Permanent arrival rate reductions at SFO
Today | 04:19 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,488
Likes: 98
Originally Posted by Turbosina;[url=tel:4018599
4018599[/url]]Yup. Even at the 54 rate, which I believe is the highest it ever gets at SFO, there's still flow control at peak hours. You would think the Feds could have waited until the 1R construction project is done (end October of this year) to pop this on us. UA is gonna have to reduce aircraft movements significantly in order to keep to any kind of on-time performance. Hopefully that starts with the RJs. But still. Just lousy news.
Early 2010’s there was a whole plan to add a third runway, the airport authority was gonna buy back and rehab 200% of the land they would’ve needed to take, gave the tree huggers everything they asked for, still got shot down. Good luck getting anything done in the bureaucratic nightmare. SFO is cooked.
Today | 04:20 PM
#22
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2024
Posts: 254
Likes: 151
You would think that reducing the amount of jet-fuel being burnt by aircraft in their neighborhood would be a good thing, but environmentalists never really see the big picture do they....
Today | 04:29 PM
#23
On Reserve
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 80
Likes: 1
You got that right... 🤬 That ship sailed in the 1960s, though.
Honest question though... When was the last time a net-new runway was added to a US airport with 121 service? I can't think of one new runway since I started 121 flying in 2014. Runway lengthening maybe, but a new one?
Honest question though... When was the last time a net-new runway was added to a US airport with 121 service? I can't think of one new runway since I started 121 flying in 2014. Runway lengthening maybe, but a new one?
Today | 04:56 PM
#25
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 270
From: Guppy Gear Slinger
Thing is, with the new FMS 28R approach, the number of RAs has decreased dramatically. The change has been really apparent to anyone who has operated into SFO both before and after that change. I really think this was a sharp overreaction on the part of the FAA.
Today | 05:26 PM
#26
off weekends (if Reserve)
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 83
You got that right... 🤬 That ship sailed in the 1960s, though.
Honest question though... When was the last time a net-new runway was added to a US airport with 121 service? I can't think of one new runway since I started 121 flying in 2014. Runway lengthening maybe, but a new one?
Honest question though... When was the last time a net-new runway was added to a US airport with 121 service? I can't think of one new runway since I started 121 flying in 2014. Runway lengthening maybe, but a new one?
Today | 07:13 PM
#27
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2023
Posts: 207
Likes: 21
SFO is definitely one of those airports in the system that speeds. Been there more than once when it was "VFR" coming down a visual approach when they should have been giving people IFR separation. The controllers know.
ORD, LGA, DCA, SFO...all have systemic problems which I can't believe the FAA allows persist. I guess commercial interests have a lot of pull.
ORD, LGA, DCA, SFO...all have systemic problems which I can't believe the FAA allows persist. I guess commercial interests have a lot of pull.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Rotorhead
Major
16
06-19-2008 05:27 AM
