I would like to state here before some unnamed others do:My horrifically horrible visual 28R approach at KSFO today was caused by many factors. Tantamount is the inexcusable harrassment from unnamed parties who are simply jealous of my superb aviating skills.The fact that:1. I didn't call a missed approach, (after it was painfully obvious that there was no way in hell that I would make a successful landing);2. touched down at 190 knots;3. ran off the end of 28R, careening wildly up the hill and collided with two buildings (I think one of them was Karl Malden's place), resulting in a severe fire and many virtual deaths...... is mitigated by the fact that (oh, okay, I will name names) Ian Elchitz and Rob Hall were distracting me with very superfluous information.Any contrary replies to this post can be disregarded.Sincerely,DSCVA3339

Excuses....hehe

Hahaha :)My first try into 28R wasn't the prettiest of approaches but I don't recall killing anyone on the ground :-lol

Hehe. I've botched a couple fo approaches into San Francisco in the past. Can't say they've been that bad, but that diffenitly haven't been my best. ;-)Ryan-Flightpro08 :-cool VATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Controller 1 (C-1)SAN TRACON Lead [link:www.taxiwaysigns.com]Taxiwaysigns.com Scenery Designerhttp://members.cox.net/santracon/images/san_logo.jpg-----------------------------My "Home Made" System Specs:Intel Pentium 4 2.2GHz ProcessorTurbo Gamer ATX Mid-Tower with 420W Power SupplyEPoX 4G4A Motherboard with Intel 845G ChipsetVisiontek XTASY GeForce4 128MB Ti4600 (Det 29.42 WHQL Drivers)512MB PC2100 DDR RAM40GB Matrox 7200RPM Hard DriveWindows XP Home Edition SP1*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 11298

Triple Three,I'll have you know that as a result the VFAA has temporarily suspended me (with pay) while they look investigate further to see if the crash was a result of:1) ATC Error2) Pilot Error3) Weather4) Equipment Malfunction------------------The facts:------------------- The winds were calm. - The skies were clear. - The visibility was 10nm.- The temperature was 21C.- There were no stations or previous pilots reporting wind shear or bird activity.So #3 (Weather) can be ruled out.-------------------------- ATC informed the aircraft (CVA flight #3339) that they would be conducting a visual approach to runway 28R while the aircraft was still 40nm NW of the field.- The aircraft had reported the field in sight after turning over the San Mateo Bridge.- ATC instructed the aircraft to descend to 1800 feet well before crossing the San Mateo bridge, which would have put the aircraft almost directly on the glideslope.- ATC cleared the aircraft for the visual approach, which at that point leaves both lateral and vertical navigation at the pilot's discretion (ie - responsible for own terrain separation)- ATC cleared the aircraft to land at least 5nm from the runway threshold.So #1 (ATC Error) can be ruled out.------------------The Assumptions------------------The pilot of CVA flight #3339 was a seasoned B767 veteran with over 350 hours of online time. He had made the trip into San Francisco from his home base in Vancouver, BC many times - so often in fact that he nicknamed it "The Elchitz Run", noting the fact that he would fly from one controller in Vancouver, to another in San Francisco who both had the same last name. After further investigation it has been discovered that the two controllers are, in fact brothers (possibly the only brother ATC team on Vatsim).Until the NTSB has a chance to review the flight recorder to determine if there were any system failures on board they will not have the necessary details to make any sound judgement. One thing to note was that during the flight, ATC tapes recorded the pilot making numerous calls over the radio pointing out different land marks within the San Francisco area:- The Golden Gate Bridge- Downtown San Francisco- 3Com Park- The Bay Bridge- Karl Malden's Nose- The Oakland ColliseumIt is unknown whether the pilot was aware that they were broadcasting on the ATC frequency rather than on the aircraft's PA system. There is the possibility that the pilot's made numerous calls to ATC reporting a failure, or requesting a go around that were instead sent over the PA. Finally, there were some reports of an unknown female in the cockpit at some points during the aircraft's time in controlled airspace - but at this time it is still unknown whether the female's mood was one of "calm, convincing, annoyed, or irate". This has been known in the past to highly affect a pilot's performance (even those with 5 times the experience of this pilot) - especially when a hot meal is on the table and the pilot's natural response is "but honey, I'm just descending into the bay area now - will only be 20 minutes."There is the possibility that a control failure of some sort was experienced. An off duty controller, waiting to relieve the controller working the final approach sector into San Francisco noted right before the aircraft reached the threshold that "this guy is sure coming in hot!".----------------------Hope this sheds some light on the incident. I know I slept ok last night .Ian Elchitz CYWG Oakland ARTCC - VATSIM

Ummm,Wow, Ian... okay...The Canadian Virtual Pilot's Association will make a donation to the Oakland ARTCC/Elchitz Benevolent Fund to make this all go away...DSCVA3339PS Kudos for Mr. Elchitz. Nice post my friend. I laughed until I stopped.

Nice one Ian :-lol :-lol

Still laughing here!