Hi A320,
With FDM becoming mandatory as of 2005, the Flight Safety Dept. will know a go-around has occurred, so might as well give them my version of facts in an ASR.
Th whole point is that with any form of progressive flight department, they won't
care what your version of events is unless you
don't go-around when you should have. My companies analysis of the data would be "Not stable at 1000ft, went around, end of story" (We have FDM up and running). It would not even be an FDM event.
As soon as things start being reportable/investigatable, there is a tacit pressure to avoid them. When in a situation where you are tempted to press a bad approach, you should know that doing the right thing and giving it away will not be so much as questioned.
Devis Ad,
If you go-around then the company require you to file an ASR ( so extra time in crew room filing in paper work when you could be on your way home ) to say nothing of having defeated the whole object of accepting the straight-in.
Answer ? Chuck in an orbit ( with ATC's help, of course ). Drop off the offending height & speed, there's then no need for a go-around, and voila no need for an ASR !
Though I'll admit that this won't work everywhere - but it used to be called airmanship.
So carrying out a less safe manoeuvre (see the report on the Saudi A 320) in order to avoid paper work used to be called airmanship? I'm glad it's in the past tense!!
Still, if what you are saying is that having to put in an ASR for a go-around tempts you to do low-level orbits, you have made my point brilliantly.