Originally Posted by
Request Orbit
In terms of the bigger picture, irregardless of the way it works normally - and obviously most of the time it does work - the fact that ATC are apparently incapable of providing IFR separation between two filed IFR flights in what I believe is Class B is absolutely wild to me.
You’re still very much on an IFR flight plan. It’s not a matter of capability. If you want to be able to have this many movements at a particular field, you’ll have to be operationally flexible.
Inflexibility is permitted, but it leads to delays. DLH found this out. They’re not going to sacrifice everyone else just because one plane can’t get with the program.
Originally Posted by
Request Orbit
If one aircraft is using the ILS is there something at KSFO saying every aircraft has to? I understand losing a single gap because you can’t do a parallel approach for that aircraft - it’s a heavy in this case so the gap behind is probably going to be standard separation anyway - but then you just go back to paired visuals again right?
Because of the runway spacing, the plane on the ILS to one runway affects the operation on the other runway. It’s all explained in the second (follow-up) video. The controller now has to find a gap on both runways. A heavy on an ILS takes up more space than a heavy on a visual.