Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Type 1779.32
Communication Breakdown; Workload
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
General None Reported / Taken
Weather; Human Factors; Airport
We were on arrival to SFO. About an hour out; we were rerouted to BDEGA3 arrival. ATIS was calling for landing [Runway] 10L. Arrival and runway didn't match. In 2nd to last Center sector; we were given new arrival; STLER3. Again; ATIS was calling for [Runway] 10L; which doesn't match arrival. Just prior to switching to NORCAL approach; [new] ATIS  comes out switching to simultaneous ILS and VA [visual approach] to 19L/R. Clearly from our direction; we are going to get a visual to [Runway] 19R. We decided and briefed a VA backed up by RNAV (GPS) 19R. We discussed importance of using PAPI on left. Since we had previously briefed an RNAV GPS to [Runway] 10L; we quick briefed the backup procedures for RNAV. Planned and flew flaps 30 approach with 125 ref and 132 target. Winds forecast I believe 060@14kts. We then started being vectored basically along arrival and told visual [Runway] 19R. We were switched to Final Controller who was handling left and right runways. He was also very difficult to understand. He seemed to have an accent and slightly 'slurred' type speech that drew out length of calls in fast paced environment. We were vectored to final and told to maintain visual with 737 to left runway. I inquired if we would be ahead or behind other aircraft and told 'right next to'. Runway 19L was illuminated like a bright Christmas tree and Runway 19R barely lit up. I informed First Officer; who was flying pilot; to use preceding aircraft as reference for runway. We were cleared approach; told to maintain 3;000 feet until 9 DME; and to maintain 180kts to 5 DME. We basically flew RNAV approach on autopilot following all procedures for RNAV approach. I monitored the 737 right next to us on [Runway] 19L. Winds at 2;800 feet were 060/40. I was beginning to feel uncomfortably close to 737. We configured at about 1;500 feet; First Officer disconnected autopilot and hand flew rest of approach. We were cleared to land. About 6 DME; we slowed to target of about 132 and that gave us spacing on 737 to left runway. At 900 feet I made 1;000 feet call and we were configured and stable. Runway environment for landing was relatively dark (especially compared to 19L). We also commented on no PAPI for guidance. Winds at 500 feet were about 060/30. I made 500 feet call and First Officer responded stable. I asked for wind check and winds were reported 100/14 (?). Winds at 200 feet were still about 060/25. At about 200 feet; I saw a descent rate of 1;000 feet per minute and commented 'descent rate'. First Officer made timely correction. I made a call out that crosswinds were decreasing. Landing was a bit firmer than normal but in touchdown zone and uneventful. We taxied clear and onto gate.During entire approach and landing; we were both task saturated. On reflection; I don't believe my leadership effectiveness was as good as it should have been. I never made an inquiry to Tower about brightness of runway lights or why PAPI wasn't operational. It seems to me like SFO TRACON was behind the power curve and not ready or appropriately manned for the amount of arrivals. Controllers all seemed to be over task saturated. The environment was ripe for a safety mishap. Aircraft two behind us went around. Winds were not conducive on Approach for using the 19's.
B757 Captain reported SFO ATC seemed understaffed and overworked during an arrival on a windy and rainy night.