FAA bans parallel approaches at SFO indefinitely -- Impact on UA?
Mar 30, 2026 | 11:42 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,050
FAA bans parallel approaches at SFO indefinitely -- Impact on UA?
There’s a rumor being circulated by pilots and JonNYC on Twitter and Bluesky that the FAA has banned parallel visual approaches at SFO indefinitely, instead requiring staggered ILS approaches, due to “everything that’s been going on” and not the recently started runway construction. This would lower the hourly arrival rate from 50-something to 36 per hour.
For what it’s worth, during UA’s peak evening arrival bank tonight, there were 52 scheduled arrivals across all airlines according to FR24, and a handful seemed to have 30-60 minute ground delays at their respective departure airports. Curious to see how this plays out with UA’s schedules in the coming weeks and months.
For what it’s worth, during UA’s peak evening arrival bank tonight, there were 52 scheduled arrivals across all airlines according to FR24, and a handful seemed to have 30-60 minute ground delays at their respective departure airports. Curious to see how this plays out with UA’s schedules in the coming weeks and months.
Mar 31, 2026 | 1:37 am
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, ALL Accor Diamond, IHG Platinum Elite, Marriott Bonvoy Gold, Avis PC, Hertz PC
Posts: 10,665
Without veering into OMNI, strikes me as a potential decision being made without any evidence whatsoever that supports such an action. Imagine UA would fight this action if it gets implemented.
Mar 31, 2026 | 6:58 am
#5
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 1,171
Mar 31, 2026 | 7:34 am
#6
Flyertalk Evangelist, Moderator: United Airlines MileagePlus
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL DM, UA Nostalgist, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 16,102
This seems wildly impractical as it is utterly incompatible with the current schedule at SFO. Somewhat difficult to give credence to the rumor, and imagine that it would start a massive fight if true. Would basically mean massive GDPs every single day and/or huge schedule drops.
Mar 31, 2026 | 7:41 am
#7
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM, Marriott LT Plat
Posts: 5,175
This seems wildly impractical as it is utterly incompatible with the current schedule at SFO. Somewhat difficult to give credence to the rumor, and imagine that it would start a massive fight if true. Would basically mean massive GDPs every single day and/or huge schedule drops.
Mar 31, 2026 | 7:43 am
#8
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AA EXP; UA 1MM & PP; Marriott AMB; Hyatt Globalist; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 62,039
Mar 31, 2026 | 8:05 am
#9
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM, Marriott LT Plat
Posts: 5,175
You're probably right in that it won't happen but the premise is not flawed. They could do it if they really wanted and compared to building a rail line through California with a top speed of 220 mph, it's a trivial one.
Mar 31, 2026 | 8:08 am
#10
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Silver. (Former UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat)
Posts: 9,477
I've joked that they should make six parallel runways out in the middle of the bay with taxiways to both OAK and SFO.
I wouldn't mind if they modified the current procedure to put, at least, some space between the two parallel arrivals. Maybe put a mile in trail of the other instead of wingtip to wingtip. Still could do less than the distance required by staggered approaches when the weather permits visual separation.
I wouldn't mind if they modified the current procedure to put, at least, some space between the two parallel arrivals. Maybe put a mile in trail of the other instead of wingtip to wingtip. Still could do less than the distance required by staggered approaches when the weather permits visual separation.
Mar 31, 2026 | 8:36 am
#11
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA LT Plat 2MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 72,965
Mar 31, 2026 | 9:00 am
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 2MM 1K
Posts: 16,552
I don’t know anything about requirements, but could SFO convert the northern taxiway into a runway and move that taxiway to where the 28R runway is? Or would that require some infill of bay to allow some “shoulder”?
Mar 31, 2026 | 9:15 am
#13
Flyertalk Evangelist, Moderator: United Airlines MileagePlus
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL DM, UA Nostalgist, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 16,102
If you mean turning C into a runway, IIRC this still isn't enough separation to make a difference.
Mar 31, 2026 | 9:19 am
#14
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CLE, DCA, and 30k feet
Programs: Honors LT Diamond; United 1K 1MM; Hertz PC
Posts: 5,632
Though looking at the FAA air traffic manual (https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_8.html) and the runway separation requirements for simultaneous same direction operations I feel like I'm missing something based on the discussion upthread as using the very precise measuring tool in Google Maps it appears there's already sufficient separation (even though my brain says that can't be right)
Mar 31, 2026 | 9:33 am
#15
Flyertalk Evangelist, Moderator: United Airlines MileagePlus
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL DM, UA Nostalgist, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 16,102
Though looking at the FAA air traffic manual (https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_8.html) and the runway separation requirements for simultaneous same direction operations I feel like I'm missing something based on the discussion upthread as using the very precise measuring tool in Google Maps it appears there's already sufficient separation (even though my brain says that can't be right)
Base case seems to be 3,600 ft of separation and maybe as low as 2,500 with sufficiently advanced equipment (?). The entire "island" for the 28s at touchdown, including taxiways C and F, is less than 2,500 ft wide.