The typical 'slam-dunk' approach into SFO can be a challenge at the end of an ULH flight
It was not a slam-dunk approach, it was a very usual "visual" with the distance to height at a normal rate. If for the respective pilot this seems too high and close, say it and go around.
If either call is a challenge, then you belong to the children of the magenta, or there is definitely a problem with CRM/culture.
A visual in SFO should be a treat and not a threat.
You should not continue flying such equipment if you deem that a potential threat, as simple as that.
A T7 is ETOPS qualified and i don't know if you know, but most ULH sectors are ETOPS today and ETOPS is defined by "able to descend to resp. level, with resp. speed, proceed to the ETOPS Alt, 15 min hold at 1500ft, shoot an instrument appr. and GA, then land with a visual circuit". So there is a regulatory need to be able to do a visual at a most probably unknown airfield with a low ceiling!
I expect every ULH/heavy pilot to be able to do that, daily experience makes me doubt that, however. I have repeatedly pointed out the lack of skill of todays pilots. Now that some proof materialises, i hate the watering down of the obvious.
Disabled landing aids at SFO requiring visual approach from tired long haul crew.
This is not a hole in the Swiss cheese! They were augmented, thus fatigue is a small contributing factor. And spare us that "a visual is a hole lining up" bs, please.