[kabes]

Lufthansa does what the FAA recommends and SFO had air canada almost landing on the taxiway because of the visual approach not too long ago. So calling it an asshole move is turning things around.

[ShadowBanThis01]

So punish everyone because of Air Canada's fuck-up?

[timerol]

It's not punishment. The reason air travel is so safe is because every near-miss is root-caused and policies are put in place to prevent the same cause from resulting in a future accident.

[ShadowBanThis01]

I see. So this policy has been imposed on all class-B airports?

Also, it's not a "near-miss." It's a near-hit or near-disaster.

[koyote]

There have been two major incidents around landing at SFO in the last decade, one involving fatalities.

Prioritising safety by requesting to land using ILS after a 12 hour flight should not be seen as 'punishing' everyone else.

[nerdponx]

My understanding is that the Lufthansa crew could/should have requested ILS much sooner in order to give ATC time to figure it out.

[ShadowBanThis01]

Except of course that everyone else is apparently able to handle it.

[yellow_postit]

Right up until they can’t and a new rule gets written in blood. Given the depth perception issues of lights at night this seems like a sane request.

The bigger problems are overworked ATC (fixable) and the utter mess that is SFO design (seems unlikely to fix)

[neom]

As they say, FAA rules are written in blood.

https://www.cfinotebook.net/notebook/rules-and-regulations/r...

[affyboi]

I mean, yes. Every single time there’s an aviation incident there’s an extremely thorough investigation and generally a set of concrete recommendations to go along with it.

Pilots are human, automated systems fail, and the goal is to maximize safety because these fuckups mean that 200-300 people on a single plane might die (or more if a plane crashes into another or into a populated area) and these safety regulations have saved a lot of lives.