Comments by "Sean" (@sean2015) on "Air Canada flight lands in San Francisco after being told not to" video.

+James King what is different about landing at SFO Airport from any other airport? Several other major airports have intersecting runways and/or parallel runways that are close together, similar to SFO.
3
@gsmjr8502 not only that but pilots are under a lot of pressure from the airline to minimize their fuel usage. The pilots heard the instructions very well but ignored them.
2
@rugratz3440 there is no way those pilots didn’t hear the tower instructions. They heard them loud and clear - they just didn’t want to do a go-around
2
@chicoespertoensina5317 it’s quite simple: time and money. A “go-around” would’ve required the flight crew to climb to 3000 feet or so, fly outbound 5-10 miles from the airport and then wait to be vectored and sequenced back in for approach and landing. That would’ve taken AT LEAST another 15 minutes (if not more) and that’s a lot of fuel for a large Airbus. Pilots are under enormous pressure by their airlines to get from point A to point B using the least possible amount of fuel. They are also under constant pressure from their dispatch to leave and depart on time in order to avoid disrupting “the flow” of airplanes within their service area. Then there’s the risk of complaints from passengers about missed connections. Every minute is critical in the airline industry. I understand the pilot’s mindset in this situation — I may have even done the same thing had I been in their position — but they’re crazy to expect us to believe their story about two radios failing at once.
2
and the Teabaggers blamed Obama
2
They didn’t switch frequencies, the pilots heard the instructions from the tower but pretended not to, because doing a go around would’ve added at least 20 minutes to their arrival time and would’ve cost the airline a lot of money in fuel.
1
The only problem I see with SFO Airport is there is simply not enough space or land to build more runways and taxiways
1
+millieo I'm sure you understand that many airports (particularly those in dense cities like SF) simply don't have an abundance of land on which to build lengthy runways and/or runways that are spaced far apart, they also face opposition from NIMBY groups...people all want safe airports to get them to where they're going (for business or leisure) but nobody wants the airport built anywhere near their own neighborhood
1
Glen Daly I agree but I think the original poster just went off topic for the sake of argument. Anyhow what do you suppose those two Air Canada pilots were up to? I think maybe they ignored the tower and pretended not to hear, because they didn't want to go around and enter a holding pattern and incur delays. Only the CVR will tell the whole story.
1
@tubertuber3757 investigators could have seized the CVR
1
@andreea007 ATC makes mistakes just as pilots make mistakes. In this case ATC tried to correct their mistake by having the AC pilot do a go around. The AC pilot took one look down the end of the runway and decided he had plenty of room to bring the aircraft to a stop before risking a collision. Had I been in his position, I may have done the very same thing. But let’s be honest, the Air Canada crew heard the instructions from the tower and simply pretended not to. The chances of two radios failing at once are so close to zero that they may as well be zero.
1
@andreea007 the controller gave clearance because he expected the Southwest plane to have exited and vacated the runway. Unfortunately, there was another plane on the ground that was blocking him, so the Southwest aircraft was stuck on the runway. Picture it: you’re in your car trying to make a left turn but traffic is backed up on the street you’re turning onto, so you’re stuck in the intersection and waiting for traffic to clear.
1
But they did hear the tower’s instructions - you can bet on that.
1