Question about airline go arounds

AndrewX

AndrewX

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
101
Display Name
Display name:
Andrew
Last week on a SWA flight we did a go around that "felt" like a missed approach. The pilot said he was asked to go around due to traffic. We came back and landed without issue. Yesterday my girlfriend told me her flight into Houston went around after being "just a few feet" from the ground. The pilot explained it was due to strong winds. They didn't land until the third attempt. As a pilot, I consider this normal and I'm glad that the big guys follow the same practices we do in GA. I was wondering if an airline go around is a big deal (paper work, etc.) or just consider normal flight ops?
 
We're supposed to make a company ops report if we do a go around
 
No report necessary at my airline. Captain just has to make an entry in the maintenance logbook.
 
AndrewX said:
I was wondering if an airline go around is a big deal (paper work, etc.) or just consider normal flight ops?
Click to expand...
From an ATC perspective at a place that runs a bit of airline traffic, go-arounds aren't a big deal. While I wouldn't call them normal (we strive to avoid them), they are however unavoidable. When we try to milk every ounce of capacity out of the runways and try to have the succeeding aircraft cross the threshold as the preceding one is hitting the high-speed, you're bound to have a few get a little too close. Sometimes it's an aircraft slows before the marker (when told to maintain a speed till then), sometimes after the marker they slow more than all the others, sometimes they miss the "normal" high-speed and sometimes the controller just slips up and is late slowing or still trying to figure out the speed and space that works with the current compression. In addition, there are the normal reasons all pilots go-around at times for: unstable approach, wind gust/shear, too fast, wake turb, birds, below mins, breaking action issues, etc.
 
In all my life of flying commercial (quite a lot, despite my efforts to avoid), I've been aboard for thee go-around; one, a "traffic didn't clear the runway in time" at San Antonio (on Southwest), and two (same flight) missed approaches at minimums at Monterey, Mexico on AeroMexico.

That last one was interesting, because the cockpit door was open (well pre-9/11) and I was in the aisle seat, third row - could hear it pretty well, including the "Minimums!" annunciation. The first two times, they TOGA'd at the call, the third time, one pilot said "go around" at the annunciation, the other said "momentito" and, in a scant few seconds, we touched down. I think (knowing what I know now) that it could be he "had it," as opposed he HAD it - but who knows. I do know that we ended up spending the night there, because the flight couldn't leave after we all cleared customs; props the AeroMexico, who put us all up at a hotel for the night, and fed us.
 
As a passenger I've only been on a plane once that did a go around and that was really early, to clear the way for emergency traffic behind us - at KORD.
 
Not a big deal but the airline I flew out required an explanation, think it was called 'unusual occurrence' report form. Just for go-arounds though, not a missed approach.
 
bflynn said:
As a passenger I've only been on a plane once that did a go around and that was really early, to clear the way for emergency traffic behind us - at KORD.
Click to expand...

Ditto KORD, except that it was very late just due to the preceding aircraft not having cleared the runway. The pilot-talking let a bit of exasperation into his voice.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The requirement for a post-go-around report has gone out of favor. The idea is that a "no-fault go-around" removes negative reinforcement to continue an unstable or unsafe approach due to fear of reprisal. We are encouraged to document anything that could have safety implications through the ASAP program. That would be the appropriate avenue to report the cause(s) leading to the go-around in cases where something happened that should not have happened.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
No.
Click to expand...
May depend on the airframe/mx requirements. In every airplane I've flown in, a "cycle" has been defined by different criteria. The 707s I flew, a T/O & Landing (not go-arounds) was an engine cycle. The 747, we don't count engine cycles, but instead pressure cycles, so flight above 10k is what we use. G-V/550 used engine cycles (to include go-arounds). Of course, these are all USAF airplanes. Civilian operators no doubt have their own criteria to follow.
 
Just went around in CLT last week (traffic in front didn’t clear in time) - non-event and no report necessary.
 
At a commuter I flew at years ago, a go around was to be followed with screams of terror from the cockpit.....:hairraise:
 
Zeldman said:
At a commuter I flew at years ago, a go around was to be followed with screams of terror from the cockpit.....:hairraise:
Click to expand...

Are you sure it wasn't screams of joy? At least 15 minutes more of pay. ;)
 
mscard88 said:
Are you sure it wasn't screams of joy? At least 15 minutes more of pay. ;)
Click to expand...

We got paid by the month. I knew all the short cuts......part of the reason we never went missed.....and patterns were short and tight....and the ramp was just a little too short to land the Navajo or I never would have used the runway......:yesnod:
 
We use the no-fault go-around philosophy. No report or logbook entry.
 
Every airline I've worked for has used landings as cycles, a touch and go is a cycle.

Does a late arrival require paperwork and could "go around" be cited for the cause?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Why? What do the mechanics do with it?
Click to expand...
Depends on how the airplanes are operated. At my old airline we had to include toga events in the mx log with the airplane can. The engines belonged to GE. Our lease was a sliding rate based on the utilization of the engine. TOGA was 105% thrust and we rarely used it. Go arounds were the most common time to actually use it because we flexed most takeoffs and go arounds were not an everyday thing. I’m pretty sure the manual entry in the mx can was a check and balance to what was reported electronically by the airplane.
 
I was on a Delta flight to ABQ a couple of years ago and the crew did two go-arounds before they were able to plant it on the pavement, due to very gusty winds. Two go-arounds on a 757 was a first for me.
 
No fault
No pressure
Don’t write up anything

You will get in trouble for not going around.

There is a Pilagio based at my home airport that landed last week in below or right at mins and hit so hard that they went of the runway into the mud. CVR tapes pulled by Feds....mins call and someone said “I can’t see anything” all of this is airport scuttle butt but if true then there will be certificate action.

GO AROUND
Try again or go to the alternate
 
Forget go arounds, this turned out to be more like a merry go round (Typhoon problems in Hong Kong):

 
Last edited:
Was on SWA night flight landing El Paso last year. Told my wife we’re going around a full 2 minutes before it happened. We flew nearly over 26L for Ray 4. KELP had lights on low - Biggs army airfield had their REILs flashing and we lined up to land. Am guessing at 400 AGL tower warned wrong airport
 
HKG BTDT the hills on the south side of the runway complex cause some pretty bad turbulence and in the winds reported...you were looking at 60-90 degrees off the runway at those speeds. The first report of severe turbulence and our company is required to go elsewhere. Fun airport where you can earn your money.
 
Last edited:
MD11Pilot said:
HKG BTDT the hills on the south side of the runway complex cause some pretty bad turbulence and in the winds reported...you were looking at 60-90 at those speeds. The first report of severe turbulence and our company is required to go elsewhere. Fun airport where you can earn your money.
Click to expand...

The old Hong Kong airport w/ the big sign? Seen a few videos of planes on approach, looked fun and very challenging.
 
A quick report required here. It’s “no fault”, but company wants a heads up should the Feds ask about it.
 
Go-arounds are always encouraged over an unstable approach. It's a win-win. No bent airplanes and I get paid more.
The real problem comes with the mission (get in at all costs or my ego hurts) mentality.
If it's looking doubtful, just go!

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Kritchlow said:
Your airline counts a cycle a bit different than most.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, wouldn't surprise me one bit. But, I'll follow the company manuals on this one, which requires a logbook info only write up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top