Originally Posted by
Luc Lion
I am surprised that the deviation from the stabilised approach which is at the inception of this incident is not analysed in this report.
The report states: "with a 6° left bank, and the wheel 17° to the left, the PF called out 'go around'", 6 seconds after stating that the bank angle was "strange".
I guess it means that the PF suffered a somatogravic illusion possibly coupled to some fatigue.
And I understand that, since this deviation has been followed by the correct response, going around, it is not considered as serious as the double input on the commands.
However, in my opinion, it is worth analysing if it was indeed a somatogravic illusion or if it was something else, and checking what might have triggered the illusion at that time, 2.1 nm from the threshold.
Because there has been and there will be other losses of spatial awareness in short final followed by an incorrect response and more tragic consequences.
It's weird isn't it? Literally no discussion of how the approach originally went out of kilter.