Originally Posted by
Schnowzer
8. Warned by ATC continued
Is there a penalty for a go-around at EK? Was the crew afraid to go missed on a controller's altitude alert? Did they wait for the EGWPS alert and reference a matrix to see if it was a caution or warning?
The wheel and the no-fault go around have been invented elsewhere.
Originally Posted by
v1r8
My airline every couple of months based on FOQA data shows us computer animated cockpit pictures and animations on our company app on our IPads of unstablized approaches that took place system wide last few months (obviously de identified and no flight numbers) so we can learn from what caused it. And no obviously the crew to whom this happened did not get in trouble for it.
Also based on this data we create our training events yearly. Now, if there is gross misconduct crews will get asked what happened to identify if there is a weakness in the training system, and where necessary pulled off line for extra training.
That's the way it's done in the big leagues. If I'm shooting an approach that looks like it might not be stable at 1000, I have absolutely no paperwork or penalty if I take it around and try again.
If I get it stable by 800 and land instead of going around, I'm looking over my shoulder for a courtesy call from the FOQA folks (the name changes every few years). But, I'm not intimidated into submission by any company threat or pressure on any operational decision. If I get it wrong, I get training, not punishment.