Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Handoff / Assist; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Working LCA. Local Control (LC) was informed Aircraft X (A B737) on final RWY28R could not accept wind and requested a circle to RWY 01R for landing. I can not remember wind exactly something like 090012KT. LC said unable due to Aircraft Y (CRJ7) traffic slightly behind for VA RWY28L. Aircraft Z (An A380) was in position on RWY 28R. Many other aircraft had already circled to RWY 01R for landing prior to this and were being set up for this operation landing RWY 01R by NCT Approach Sector. We were not advertising this as the approach; we were advertising landing RWYS 28L and 28R. We were not getting any guidance from Tower FLM or TMC due to FLM coordinating a change to SE plan and flow times. The situation was very complicated with SFIA operations requesting runway checks; some aircraft landing RWYS 28 and some landing RWY 01R. Aircraft going around for wind. Aircraft X said they would continue for 28R and go around 'when they were on the deck' if the wind was still unacceptable. Just a few seconds (maybe 5) later Aircraft X declared a go around. LC issued a 265 heading and a climb to 3100 feet. I advised LC that Aircraft X would cut in front of Aircraft Y. I coordinated the missed approach with NCT Sutro Sector. Aircraft Y contacted SFO TWR and declared a missed approach due to wind. Aircraft Y was issued a 280 heading and a climb to 3000 feet. Both aircraft were told to contact NCT Departure.Do not vector missed approaches in front of a parallel arrival. Our FLM was busy with other issues at the time and I feel if we had more TM staffing; the FLM could have been monitoring the situation better. As soon as aircraft started landing RWYS 01; that was a warning sign that we should have already been on a 19/10 SE Plan configuration. The winds had been favoring 19/10 since I had arrived at work.


Second narrative: A380 (Aircraft Z) was loaded up on runway 28r for departure. There was a 10-14 kts tailwind. (09012kts) In this situation the airport would normally be in the southeast configuration. Landind on runways 19L/R and departing off runways 10L/R. However; for some reason this was not the case; and as a result the pilots that were sequenced to runways 28L and 28R were requesting to circle to land on runways 01.As we were departing of runways 01 and 28 it is very difficult to time traffic landing on runways 01 and 28 at the same time. I was working local control position and a Boeing 737 (Aircraft X) checked in on final for runway 28R but said there was to much tailwind to land on runway 28. They requested to cirlcle to runway 01 for landing. A CRJ7 (Aircraft Y) was about one mile in trail for runway 28L. Aircraft X was told unable the circle to land on runway 01 due to the traffic behind and to their left for runway 28L. And to expect a go around for sequencing.As Aircraft X was at about a three mile final; the pilot requested further instructions; I told them to go around and turn left to 265 heading and climb to 3100 FT. I was getting ready to clear Aircraft Z for takeoff on runway 28R when Aircraft Y advised that they also could not take the landing on runway 28L due to the strong tailwind. It became clear that it would not be a good idea to launch Aircraft Z (A380) off runway 28R. There were also aircraft waiting to depart runways 01L/R. The radar coordinator said to watch the two going around; that is when I noticed that Aircraft X had slowed down quite a bit and Aircraft Y had not slowed down. Looking at the radar scope it appeared that Aircraft X had turned close in front of Aircraft Y. I was so occupied with so many unusual situations that I am not sure how close the two airplanes were to each other.I would recommend that when the winds are more than five to seven knots out of the south or east that this airport should be using different runways. Specifically runways 10 and 19. Perhaps the supervisor could call NCT and Oakland Center and tell them that the wind and weather make it neccessary to use a different runway configuration. And that we get three or more miles between each aircraft that is lined up for a runway that does not conform to the weather situation. Also would recommend that the Aircraft Z (A380) not be allowed to fly into this airport (SFO) since it does not fit on some of the taxiways. And has so many restrictions to its movement on and around the airport.


Synopsis: SFO Controllers describe a situation where pilots were requesting to circle to another runway due to winds; confusion ensues and losses of separation occur. FLM and TMC do not help to change the airport configuration and give direction to the controllers.