This thread is a continuation of a post I made in the thread relating to "What is the real minima?".
QUOTE:
This discussion reminds me of an issue that I fear is mostly overlooked regarding MDA's, DA's and missed approaches.
Here we are talking about how much of a big deal it is whether or not the momentum of your aircraft will take you below the MDA if you initiate a go-around
at rather than
above the published MDA.
That's fine. But who here has thought about this. You arrive at the MDA. You're "Visual", so you continue the approach below MDA toward the landing runway (I'm thinking of a runway aligned approach here). Then, for whatever reason, you decide to discontinue the approach, you press TOGA and head skyward again.
Reasons for the late Go-Around / Aborted Landing?
1) Becoming visual but subsequently losing visual reference again due to cloud drifting across the flight path.
2) Flying into ever increasing precipitation that makes it increasingly difficult to see through the windscreen.
3) Windshear and/or turbulence. (Not necesarily asociated with microburst/thunderstorms).
4) Previous landing aircraft too slow vacating the runway.
5) Previous departing aircraft Rejecting Take-Off and remaining on runway.
6) Animals on runway.
7) Crosswind component above Operations Manual "limits"
So here you are, going around not that far off the deck. Makes the previous concerns about MDA vs RA rather academic! You have now possibly progressed 1 or 2 nm beyond the Missed Approach Point, at an altitude 100 ft, 200 ft, 500 ft below MDA. What the @#$%$ are you going to do now?!?! Have you even thought about what you'd do if or WHEN this happens to you?
UNQUOTE
Just an observation. Once you have safely landed on the runway, There's a good chance that you (or at least your aircraft with another crew) are going to be taking-off from that same runway. It'll be starting out at ground level, at zero knots, possibly at MTOW! Think how it's curent potential and kinetic enery levels (zero) compares to the aircraft deciding whether or not it's ok to descend below MDA [140 kts at 500 ft AGL (for example)].
So in one way it is a big deal that you are initiating a go-around so late, and in another way it isn't because you most likely going to be taking-off from that same runway shortly afterwards.
And there I think might be the answer.
If you have to go around your choises are either:
1. Climb to the Circling Minima and join a visual circuit while remaining inside the Circling Area, or
2. Climb back in to the cloud and not level off until you reach a safe altitude.
Now if you have to take option 2. then you have to think about the path along the ground that will afford you the greatest terrain clearance. For my thinking, the published missed approach tracking is no longer valid because you are well and truely below it's designed climb gradient requirements.
I would be thinking more along the lines of where I 'd be tracking during a take-off. And why not?! You're lined up with the runway. The authorities have surveyed the area along the extended centreline up to 15,000 metres (in Australia in any case for Catagory 4 runways).
So if it is OK to take-off straight ahead, surely straight ahead is your best way out of your predicament.
If your take-off procedures for a particular runway require a turn in the case of a normal all-engine take-off, or if in the case of an engine failure on take-off requires specific alternative tracking, I would suggest you follow that procedure until you reach a safe altitude.
Also keep in mind the minimum accelleration altitude used for take-offs from that runway. Might be more than 1000 ft AGL or 1000 ft above MDA.
