San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA

Airport Location:  The San Francisco International Airport is located 8 miles south east of San Francisco, California.

Airport History:

The airport was first opened on May 7, 1927 on 150 acres of cow pasture. The land was leased from prominent local landowner Ogden L. Mills, and was named Mills Field Municipal Airport. It remained Mills Field until 1931, when it was renamed San Francisco Municipal Airport. "Municipal" was replaced by "International" in 1955.

United Airlines, Pan American World Airways used Mills Field throughout the 1930s and Domestic commercial traffic increased dramatically with the advent of World War II when Oakland International Airport was taken over by the military and its passenger flight diverted to San Francisco.

The airport was expanded in the 1950s to accommodate United Airlines maintenance facility for the new Douglas DC-8s. 

The San Francisco International Airport has continued to expand including a new international terminal which opened in 2000 and in 2003 the Bay Area Rapid Transit system to the airport opened.

San Francisco Airport Today:  Obstructions reported; Buildings; Power lines; Birds in the area; Airline services; Helicopter and military  operations; Frequent weather delays;



Airport Services and Amenities:  Signature Flight Support; Fuel; Chevron Texaco Jet, 100LL; Restaurants on the field; Andale Mexican; Burger Joint; Deli Up Cafe; Firewood Cafe; Harry Denton's;  Public transportation; Courtesy car; Taxis; Rental cars available; Lodging within 3 miles; US Customs;
 
Special Events and Attractions:  Cable Cars; California Marine Mammal Center; Golden Gate Bridge; The Exploratorium; Hiller Aircraft Museum;

Airport Area Accident History:

Incident occurred Saturday, March 27, 2010 in San Francisco, CA
Aircraft: BOEING 777-222, registration: N216UA
Injuries: Unavailable

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.

On March 27, 2010, at approximately 1115 Pacific daylight savings time (1815 UTC) United Airlines flight 889, B777-222, received a traffic collision avoidance system (TCAS) alert as the flight departed the San Francisco International Airport (SFO), San Francisco, California. SFO tower controller cleared the flight for takeoff from runway 28L on the MOLEN 3 departure with clearance to climb to 3,000 mean sea level (msl). The flying First Officer reported after the landing gear was retracted at approximately the runway end, and at 1,100 msl, he heard the tower controller report traffic at 1 o'clock. This was followed immediately by the TCAS “TRAFFIC TRAFFIC” warning. According to the TCAS, the target was at 1,400 msl. The pilots visually acquired a light high wing airplane in a hard left turn at their 1 o'clock position. Both crew members reported seeing only the underside of the airplane. Distance to the airplane described as slant range was 200-300
feet. The First Officer's response was to push forward on the yoke to level the airplane. The other airplane disappeared from view through the 3 o'clock position. The First Officer then looked back into the cockpit at which time TCAS annunciated “ADJUST VERTICAL SPEED”, followed by a “DESCEND, DESCEND” command. The First Officer stated he complied with a push over to comply. The climb on MOLEN 3 was then continued. The crew filed a near mid-air collision report.
= = =
= = =

Accident occurred Saturday, August 16, 2008 in San Francisco, CA
Aircraft: Boeing 777-300, registration: B-16710
Injuries: 1 Serious, 312 Uninjured. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On August 16, 2008, at 0202 Pacific daylight time, Eva Air 17, Taiwanese registry B16710, a Boeing 777-300, was being pushed back from the gate when a mechanic was pinned under the left nose gear at San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, California. The flight and cabin crews, and 294 passengers were not injured; the mechanic sustained serious injuries. There was no damage to the airplane. Eva Air was operating the airplane under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 129. The scheduled international passenger flight was destined for Taoyuan International Airport, Taipei, Taiwan. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight plan was filed. According to airport operations personnel, an Eva Air mechanic and a Swissport ramp employee were pushing the flight back from the gate. The tow bar was then removed, the airplane came forward, and the mechanic was pinned under the left nose gear. ===
Accident occurred Saturday, June 28, 2008 in San Francisco, CA
Aircraft: Boeing 767, registration: N799AX
Injuries: 2 Uninjured. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On June 28, 2008 at approximately 10:15 pm pacific daylight time, Airborne Express flight 1611, a Boeing 767 aircraft, registration N799AX, caught fire just aft of the cockpit area while the flightcrew were preparing to start the engines. The airplane was parked at plot 11 at the San Francisco International Airport with all cargo loaded at the time the fire erupted. Both flightcrew members exited the aircraft safely via the cockpit windows. The airport rescue and fire fighting unit (ARFF) extinguished the fire. The fire burned a hole through the crown of the aircraft in the forward galley area. No injuries were reported and the aircraft was substantially damaged. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, January 13, 2008 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 8/28/2008
Aircraft: Bombardier, Inc. CL-600-2C10, registration: N705SK
Injuries: 60 Uninjured.
A Boeing 757-222 airplane and a Bombardier Inc. CL-600-2C10 were substantially damaged when the tails of both airplanes collided during the pushback process from two adjacent terminal gates during night visual meteorological conditions. The flight crew of the CL-600-2C10 reported that during the final stages of pushback from gate 79, they were in a stopped position with both engines running while their ground crew was in the process of disconnecting the tug when the collision occurred. Company maintenance personnel stated they were pushing the 757-222 back from gate 80 without the use of wing-walkers or tail walkers to relocate the airplane to another location on the airport and did not see the CL-600-2C10. Review of Air Traffic Control (ATC) communication recordings between ground control and both airplanes revealed that the 757-222 was initially cleared for pushback onto taxiway alpha from gate 80. About 41 seconds later, the ground controller cleared the CL-600-2C10 to push back onto taxiway alpha from gate 79. The recordings revealed that the ground controller did not advise either aircraft of near simultaneous adjacent pushback operations. The controller stated that he believed there was room for both aircraft to push back and did not foresee a traffic conflict. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The company tug operator of the other airplane's failure to maintain clearance with this aircraft during the pushback process. Also causal was the ground controller's failure to alert the pilot of this aircraft and tug operator of the other airplane of the simultaneous pushback occurring from adjacent gates. Contributing to the accident was the company's pushback operation without the use of wing/tail walkers. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, January 13, 2008 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 8/28/2008
Aircraft: Boeing 757-222, registration: N508UA
Injuries: 60 Uninjured.
A Boeing 757-222 airplane and a Bombardier Inc. CL-600-2C10 were substantially damaged when the tails of both airplanes collided during the pushback process from two adjacent terminal gates during night visual meteorological conditions. The flight crew of the CL-600-2C10 reported that during the final stages of pushback from gate 79, they were in a stopped position with both engines running while their ground crew was in the process of disconnecting the tug when the collision occurred. Company maintenance personnel stated they were pushing the 757-222 back from gate 80 without the use of wing-walkers or tail walkers to relocate the airplane to another location on the airport and did not see the CL-600-2C10. Review of Air Traffic Control (ATC) communication recordings between ground control and both airplanes revealed that the 757-222 was initially cleared for pushback onto taxiway alpha from gate 80. About 41 seconds later, the ground controller cleared the CL-600-2C10 to push back onto taxiway alpha from gate 79. The recordings revealed that the ground controller did not advise either aircraft of near simultaneous adjacent pushback operations. The controller stated that he believed there was room for both aircraft to push back and did not foresee a traffic conflict. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The company tug operator's failure to maintain clearance with another aircraft during the pushback process. Also causal was the ground controller's failure to alert the pilot of the other aircraft and tug operator of this airplane of the simultaneous pushback occurring from adjacent gates. Contributing to the accident was the company's pushback operation without the use of wing/tail walkers. ===
Incident occurred Saturday, May 26, 2007 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 11/30/2007
Aircraft: Embraer 120, registration: N232SW
Injuries: 92 Uninjured.
On May 26, 2007, at 1336 Pacific daylight time, Republic Airlines flight 4912 (RPA4912), an Embraer 170 regional jet, and Skywest Airlines flight 5741 (SKW5741), an Embraer Brasilia turboprop, nearly collided in the intersection of runway1L and runway 28R at San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, California. Both aircraft were operating as scheduled passenger flights under 14 CFR part 121 and were operating on instrument flight plans. There were no reported injuries to occupants and no reported damage to either aircraft. SKW5741 was arriving at SFO after a flight from Modesto, California. The aircraft was cleared for a visual approach by Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (NCT) and transferred to SFO tower. The crew contacted the SFO local controller at 1332:29, reporting that they were six miles out on the BRIJJ visual approach. The local controller acknowledged, issued a wake turbulence advisory for a Boeing 757 landing on runway 28L, and cleared SKW5741 to land on runway 28R. According to NCT radar data, the aircraft crossed the runway threshold at 1335:13. RPA4912 (radio callsign "Brickyard 4912"), taxied to runway 1L and was instructed to taxi onto the runway to hold at 1333:36. RPA4912 was cleared for takeoff at 1335:12. The crew acknowledged. At 1335:40, during a transmission to an uninvolved aircraft by the local controller, an aural AMASS warning is audible in the background. At 1335:44, the local controller begins attempting to instruct SKW5741 to stop, transmitting, "uh, Skywest HOLD HOLD HOLD". According to controllers' written statements, SKW5741 came to a stop in the intersection of runways 1L and 28R. RPA4912 lifted off and overflew SKW5741. The initial FAA tower report estimated the aircraft missed colliding by 300 feet. However, the Skywest crew estimated the distance as 30 to 50 feet and the crew of RPA4912 estimated 150 feet. They characterized their estimate as a "guess," noting that they could not actually see the Brasilia as they passed over the top of the aircraft. SFO ATCT is equipped with an Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) that uses radar to track aircraft on and near the airport surface, providing conflict detection and aircraft location information to controllers. The system is able to detect conflicts between aircraft using the same runway, and, following a software modification that was installed on February 17, 2007, the system is also able to detect conflicts between aircraft using intersecting runways. SKW5741's approach was tracked by NCT's ASR-9 terminal radar system located at Oakland International Airport, approximately 8 miles north of SFO. The Oakland radar system does not provide surface coverage at SFO, but it did detect RPA4912 climbing off the airport immediately after the incident. Comparison of the NCT radar time with the AMASS radar time indicated that the AMASS clock was about 15 to 16 seconds fast in relation to the NCT clock. The NCT clock is set and checked every shift, but the AMASS clock time is derived from the internal clock of the computer running AMASS and is more subject to error. Therefore, this report will consider the ARTS clock as authoritative and AMASS times will be corrected accordingly. The AMASS system recorded data for both RPA4912 and SKW5741, detecting the conflict and alerting controllers at 1335:40. The AMASS targets for the two aircraft merged in the runway intersection at 1335:55. RPA1912 first appears on the OAK ASR-9 just south of taxiway V at 1335:59, climbing through 200 feet.
PERSONNEL INFORMATION The crew of RPA4912 consisted of a captain, first officer, and 1 flight attendant. The crew of SKW5741 included an upgrade captain receiving initial operating experience training, a check airman acting as first officer, and 1 flight attendant. Certification and flight experience information for the crews was not requested. The local controller involved entered on duty with the FAA in 1988, and has been fully certified as a tower controller at SFO since 1999. Following the incident, the controller was decertified, required to complete additional training, and recertified by SFO management. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION RPA4912 was an Embraer 170 regional jet, registration N757AT. SKW5741 was an Embraer 120 turboprop, registration N232SW. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION At 1956 UTC, the SFO weather observation was wind 320 at 13 knots, visibility 10 miles, few clouds at 1,100 feet, temperature 18, dew point 10, altimeter 29.95 inches. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION No damage was reported to either aircraft. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Air Traffic Control Information SFO Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is an ATC-10 level facility responsible for aircraft operations on the airport surface and in the class B airspace in the immediate vicinity of the airport. Arrivals and departures are handled by Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (NCT), located in Rancho Cordova, GA. The tower is equipped with an Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) ground radar, which is used by controllers to track and identify aircraft operating on the airport surface. AMASS provides a limited conflict detection capability that permits it to alert controllers about certain types of ground conflicts between aircraft as well as inadvertent use of closed or inactive runways. According to AMASS technical support personnel, in a scenario such as this conflict, AMASS is designed to provide an alert 15 seconds before the aircraft reach the conflict point, and the system performed as designed. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows: Failure of SFO tower local controller to provide adequate separation between two aircraft departing intersecting runways. ===
Incident occurred Saturday, May 26, 2007 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 11/30/2007
Aircraft: Embraer 170, registration: N872RW
Injuries: 92 Uninjured.
On May 26, 2007, at 1336 Pacific daylight time, Republic Airlines flight 4912 (RPA4912), an Embraer 170 regional jet, and Skywest Airlines flight 5741 (SKW5741), an Embraer Brasilia turboprop, nearly collided in the intersection of runway 1L and runway 28R at San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, California. Both aircraft were operating as scheduled passenger flights under 14 CFR part 121 and were operating on instrument flight plans. There were no reported injuries to occupants and no reported damage to either aircraft. SKW5741 was arriving at SFO after a flight from Modesto, California. The aircraft was cleared for a visual approach by Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (NCT) and transferred to SFO tower. The crew contacted the SFO local controller at 1332:29, reporting that they were six miles out on the BRIJJ visual approach. The local controller acknowledged, issued a wake turbulence advisory for a Boeing 757 landing on runway 28L, and cleared SKW5741 to land on runway 28R. According to NCT radar data, the aircraft crossed the runway threshold at 1335:13. RPA4912 (radio callsign "Brickyard 4912"), taxied to runway 1L and was instructed to taxi onto the runway to hold at 1333:36. RPA4912 was cleared for takeoff at 1335:12. The crew acknowledged. At 1335:40, during a transmission to an uninvolved aircraft by the local controller, an aural AMASS warning is audible in the background. At 1335:44, the local controller begins attempting to instruct SKW5741 to stop, transmitting, "uh, Skywest HOLD HOLD HOLD". According to controllers' written statements, SKW5741 came to a stop in the intersection of runways 1L and 28R. RPA4912 lifted off and overflew SKW5741. The initial FAA tower report estimated the aircraft missed colliding by 300 feet. However, the Skywest crew estimated the distance as 30 to 50 feet and the crew of RPA4912 estimated 150 feet. They characterized their estimate as a "guess," noting that they could not actually see the Brasilia as they passed over the top of the aircraft. SFO ATCT is equipped with an Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) that uses radar to track aircraft on and near the airport surface, providing conflict detection and aircraft location information to controllers. The system is able to detect conflicts between aircraft using the same runway, and, following a software modification that was installed on February 17, 2007, the system is also able to detect conflicts between aircraft using intersecting runways. SKW5741's approach was tracked by NCT's ASR-9 terminal radar system located at Oakland International Airport, approximately 8 miles north of SFO. The Oakland radar system does not provide surface coverage at SFO, but it did detect RPA4912 climbing off the airport immediately after the incident. Comparison of the NCT radar time with the AMASS radar time indicated that the AMASS clock was about 15 to 16 seconds fast in relation to the NCT clock. The NCT clock is set and checked every shift, but the AMASS clock time is derived from the internal clock of the computer running AMASS and is more subject to error. Therefore, this report will consider the ARTS clock as authoritative and AMASS times will be corrected accordingly. The AMASS system recorded data for both RPA4912 and SKW5741, detecting the conflict and alerting controllers at 1335:40. The AMASS targets for the two aircraft merged in the runway intersection at 1335:55. RPA1912 first appears on the OAK ASR-9 just south of taxiway V at 1335:59, climbing through 200 feet.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows: Failure of SFO tower local controller to provide adequate separation between two aircraft departing intersecting runways. ===
Accident occurred Saturday, September 11, 2004 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2006
Aircraft: British Aerospace BAE 125-1000A, registration: N520QS
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.
The business jet experienced a fire in the aft equipment bay while holding short for takeoff. The two-person aircrew were performing a positioning flight. While the airplane was holding short for takeoff, the crew noticed a Master Caution and a Pack & Aux Overheat warning light illuminated on the cockpit annunciator panel, followed by a Rear Baggage Smoke Detector warning light. The crew shut down the APU. The captain declared an emergency and the crew evacuated the airplane. Fire crews arrived shortly thereafter, and determined that the fire had extinguished itself. Examination of the aft pressure bulkhead by the manufacturer revealed metal discoloration and soot residue, and it was determined that there was structural damage to the aft pressure bulkhead due to a heat induced loss of material temper. After the incident the operator inspected the aft equipment bay and identified a hydraulic line with a pinhole leak. The stainless steel hydraulic line had a small crater like deformation with evidence of recast metal and a 0.005-inch hole at the base of the crater, which is consistent with damage caused by an electrical arc. There was no evidence of chafing on the hydraulic line. Copper, cadmium, and nickel material were acid rinsed from the crater; none of which are listed as alloying element in stainless steel. Copper wire is commonly used as an electrical circuit conductor. A pinhole leak could be expected to atomize the hydraulic fluid that was at 3,000 psi. The hydraulic system working fluid used was Aeroshell Fluid 41, which has a reported flash point between 221F and 230F. The electrical looms/cables that were in the aft equipment bay were disposed of prior to the Safety Board initiating the accident investigation; therefore, determination or identification of the electrical arc source was not possible.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: An electrical arc from an undetermined source initiated a hydraulic line rupture, which resulted in an equipment bay fire. ===
Accident occurred Friday, November 14, 2003 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2007
Aircraft: Boeing 747-422, registration: N178UA
Injuries: 356 Uninjured.
The airplane experienced a tail strike on rotation. The first officer was the flying pilot for the takeoff on runway 10L. The winds were from 180 degrees at 16, gusting to 22 knots. The takeoff roll was normal, and the flying pilot utilized control wheel input to correct for the crosswind. A few seconds after rotation, the crew noted the stick shaker annunciate, and flying pilot responded by gently easing back pressure off the control yoke. The crew returned to land at the departure airport after controllers in the tower reported that the airplane may have struck the tail. Flight Data Recorder (FDR) information indicated that the takeoff occurred during directionally variable wind conditions. The wind shifted during the takeoff roll, resulting in a decreasing headwind, an increasing crosswind, and finally to an average 8-knot tailwind during rotation. The maximum pitch rate during rotation was slightly higher than average, but within the normal expected variation. Analysis of the data showed this was a minor contributor to the tail strike. The flying pilot used significant wheel input (35 degrees right wheel) to counter the increasing crosswind, which resulted in the right spoiler raising 12 degrees and a corresponding loss of lift due to the use of spoilers. Rotating at a lower airspeed requires a higher angle of attack, and therefore, a higher pitch attitude to achieve liftoff. The combination of the tailwind gust and spoiler movement resulted in the airplane's pitch attitude exceeding 12.6 degrees while the gear was still on the ground. This resulted in the aft body contact with the runway. During a typical takeoff in gusty or strong crosswind conditions, the manufacturer recommended maximum takeoff thrust and to avoid rotation during a gust. Slightly delaying rotation would allow the airplane additional time to accelerate through the gust, and the greater airspeed would improve the tail clearance margin. The FDR-recorded longitudinal control system parameters suggested a properly functioning system. The airplane motion was consistent with the control inputs and power settings. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: a tail strike due to a combination of the wind shifting from a headwind to a tailwind during rotation, and the pilot's control inputs for the crosswind condition. ===
Accident occurred Tuesday, October 07, 2003 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/20/2005
Aircraft: Boeing 777-22B, registration: N222UA
Injuries: 450 Uninjured.
An All Nippon Airways (ANA) Boeing 777-281 and a United Airlines (UAL) Boeing 777-22B both sustained substantial damage during an on-ground collision between both airplanes' right wing tips. The collision occurred in a nonmovement area ramp surrounding the G terminal. This ramp area is under the control of a local ground control tower operated by United Airlines. Both aircraft were under the control of the ramp control tower at the time of the collision. The transfer of ground control responsibility from the ramp control tower to the Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Control Tower for an aircraft arriving or departing the G terminal is Spot 10. Spot 10 is where the G-ramp intersects taxiway A. Gate G-102 is the closest terminal gate to Spot 10 and is along the southern boundary of taxiway A. The ANA 777 had been cleared to taxi to Spot 10 by the ramp control tower was taxing outbound past gate G-102. The UAL 777 had been cleared by the ramp control tower to push back from gate G-102. Review of the recorded radio communications revealed that the ramp controller did not issue a cautionary advisory to either crew regarding the movements of the respective airplanes. The UAL 777 push back tractor driver saw the ANA 777 approach and stopped the push back just moments before the collision. The ANA flight crew saw the UAL 777 and maneuvered slightly to the left, away from the airplane, in an attempt to ensure wing tip clearance just prior to contact. None of the pilots on the ANA 777 could visually see their airplane's wingtips from the cockpit. The UAL 777's wing walker was on the left side of the airplane blocking traffic and noticed the ANA 777's approach and collision just moments after the UAL 777's push back was halted. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the failure of the taxiing Boeing 777's flight crew to maintain clearance from a Boeing 777 that was being pushed back from the gate. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the local ramp controller to caution either aircrew of a possible movement conflict. ===
Accident occurred Tuesday, October 07, 2003 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/20/2005
Aircraft: Boeing 777-281, registration: JA709A
Injuries: 450 Uninjured.
An All Nippon Airways (ANA) Boeing 777-281 and an United Airlines (UAL) Boeing 777-22B both sustained substantial damage during an on-ground collision between both airplanes' right wing tips. The collision occurred in a nonmovement area ramp surrounding the G terminal. This ramp area is under the control of a local ground control tower operated by United Airlines. Both aircraft were under the control of the ramp control tower at the time of the collision. The transfer of ground control responsibility from the ramp control tower to the Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Control Tower for an aircraft arriving or departing the G terminal is Spot 10. Spot 10 is where the G-ramp intersects taxiway A. Gate G-102 is the closest terminal gate to Spot 10 and is along the southern boundary of taxiway A. The ANA 777 had been cleared to taxi to Spot 10 by the ramp control tower was taxing outbound past gate G-102. The UAL 777 had been cleared by the ramp control tower to push back from gate G-102. Review of the recorded radio communications revealed that the ramp controller did not issue a cautionary advisory to either crew regarding the movements of the respective airplanes. The UAL 777 push back tractor driver saw the ANA 777 approach and stopped the push back just moments before the collision. The ANA flight crew saw the UAL 777 and maneuvered slightly to the left, away from the airplane, in an attempt to ensure wing tip clearance just prior to contact. None of the pilots on the ANA 777 could visually see their airplane's wingtips from the cockpit. The UAL 777's wing walker was on the left side of the airplane blocking traffic and noticed the ANA 777's approach and collision just moments after the UAL 777's push back was halted.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the failure of the taxiing Boeing 777's flight crew to maintain clearance from a Boeing 777 that was being pushed back from the gate. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the local ramp controller to caution either aircrew of a possible movement conflict. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, February 16, 2003 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 10/28/2004
Aircraft: Cessna 421C, registration: N321FL
Injuries: 5 Uninjured.
A maintenance truck driver failed to observe an airplane that had just landed and was taxing to the ramp on a course perpendicular to the driver's direction of travel. The westbound truck, that was proceeding on a vehicle access road, collided with the leading edge of the northbound airplane's right wing. During a dark night, the pilot had landed on runway 28R. Thereafter, he received a clearance to taxi to the ramp via a specified route. Approaching the designated parking area, the pilot negotiated a right 90-degree turn and again proceeded in a northerly direction toward a fixed base operator's parking area; the airplane's ground track crossed an airport service road. The truck driver failed to comply with published airport procedures by not yielding to the approaching airplane.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The vehicle driver's inadequate visual lookout and failure to follow established procedures. A contributing factor was the dark nighttime condition. ===
Accident occurred Thursday, July 12, 2001 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 6/25/2003
Aircraft: Bell 206B, registration: N474SF
Injuries: 4 Uninjured.
The helicopter made a hard landing and severed the tail boom after an in-flight engine failure and autorotation. The pilot reported seeing an engine chip light and hearing a whining sound in the engine about 700 feet agl. An engine out light followed by a complete engine failure occurred about 1 minute later. The pilot had been descending to land in an open field by that time. The collective was lowered to enter an autorotation and aft cyclic applied to slow the forward airspeed. As he neared the bottom of the maneuver, he pulled collective pitch to cushion the landing; however, the helicopter abruptly spun 90 degrees to the left. The main rotor blades struck the tail boom and the ground. The tail boom was separated from the helicopter. After an inspection and teardown of the engine, the 2 1/2 bearing was found to have failed in fatigue. Records revealed that a chip light had been reported in the same helicopter on a flight (4) days prior. Before being returned to service, a magnetic plug inspection/cleaning and an engine ground test run were performed. According to the Allision 250 Series Operation and Maintenance Manual, when either a chip light is encountered after a gearbox flush and a second ground test run has been performed or when a total of (4) chip lights have been encountered within 50 hours of engine operation, the engine must be removed from service and sent to the manufacturer's authorized maintenance center. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The failure of the accessory gearbox 2 1/2 bearing in fatigue resulting in the complete loss of engine power and a subsequent forced landing. The pilot's failure to maintain directional control during the autorotational flare maneuver is also causal. The operator's failure to comply with the recommendations in the engine service manual regarding removal of the engine from service for detailed inspection is a factor. ===
Accident occurred Wednesday, July 11, 2001 in San Francisco, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 6/2/2004
Aircraft: Boeing 757-232, registration: N644DL
Injuries: 1 Serious, 1 Minor, 98 Uninjured.
The air carrier transport airplane experienced an abrupt maneuver during its initial descent. The first officer reported that the flight crew had been cleared to descend from FL 390 to FL 330. The captain initiated the descent and the first officer began programming the flight management system. The first officer looked up as the airplane was flying past FL330 and queried the captain. The captain then immediately pulled the aircraft out of the descent and leveled off at FL330. Shortly thereafter, the flight crew was notified of a passenger injury resulting from the event. The captain reported to the passengers that they encountered turbulence. All of the flight attendants reported a smooth flight prior to the event. The captain had illuminated the fasten seat belt sign, but no one could remember an announcement accompanying the sign illumination. All of the flight attendants and an injured passenger, who was in the lavatory at the time of the event, described being pushed downward during the occurrence. There were no flight data recorders, cockpit voice recorders, or air traffic control recordings to review, because the Safety Board was not notified of the accident until almost 1 year after the event. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the captain's excessive use of the flight controls to level off from a descent, which resulted in a passenger injury. ===
Incident occurred Monday, March 13, 2000 in SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 10/31/2006
Aircraft: Boeing 727-232, registration: N516DA
Injuries: 77 Uninjured.
The airplane landed with the right main landing gear partially extended. This was the second leg of the day in the airplane for this crew; the second officer (SO) completed walk around inspections prior to both flights and noted no discrepancies. The captain was hand flying the airplane in the initial takeoff climb, and selected landing gear up passing through 300 to 500 feet above ground level (agl). The red "doors" light illuminated on the front panel and the amber right main gear door light illuminated on the second officer's panel. All attempts to lower the right main gear were unsuccessful, so the captain elected to return to the airport and land with the right main gear extended about 15 degrees. Inspection of the right main landing gear revealed that the safety bar bent down about 20 degrees at the leading edge and 15 degrees at its midpoint. The safety bar's inboard flanges buckled just below the reinforced area. The inner gear door drive rod bent aft about 15 degrees at the upper attachment fitting, and the tube buckled and separated below the four attachment nuts. The outboard section of the clamshell gear door sustained mechanical damage. Examination of the airplane revealed that the door rods were not loose, and all were in good condition. A general inspection of the wheel well revealed no other damage. There was no abnormal wear or movement marks on the up-lock hook, and the hook was properly adjusted. The actuator adjustor plate was properly installed. Delta maintenance technicians installed new clamshell door halves and a new drive rod. They serviced the strut, isolated the right main clamshell gear door, and cycled the gear. Then they cycled the right main wheel with the door. Finally, they cycled all of the landing gear together. All wheels and doors cycled in proper sequence. Metallurgical examination discovered no cracks in the safety plate. There were no fatigue crack arrest marks or corrosion in the fracture faces on the drive rod; it fractured as a result of overstress. A black coating that felt greasy covered the interior side of the outer clamshell door. There was a rectangular scuffmark in the center of the black area, which had its long axis parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane. The black coating appeared pushed into a slight ridge along the outer edge of the scuffmark. A small piece of rubber was under a rivet in the middle of the scuffmark. After placing the tire and gear door together to match their positions when the airplane came to rest, the tire did not touch the scuffmark. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) examination of the small piece of rubber and samples from the tire and a chock determined that they were all hydrocarbon compounds, but could not distinguish between the samples. Whether the scuffmark and rubber piece came from runway debris or another rubber object could not be determined. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows: failure of the right main landing gear to fully extend for undetermined reasons.

Airport Approach / Landing: