WF
I guess you had the Jepp handy, or you have an increadable memory <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
As you say, the missed approaches are a little more complicated.
They are not too bad, not too complicated, but as you might agree, a 1076 ft indicated or a 1577 ft indicated should have been better been rounded to 1000 ft or 2000 ft (may be for someone to pick up on)
Thank you for the input!
Next left
yes, I thought you were a little grumpy, but no hard feelings. My "Nut" was may be not the most tactical word to use, but it expressed my feeling best, because sometimes I wonder what people ask me to remember in a go-around which I consider pretty unusual and therefor "dangerous".
I don't think it is the meaning of a go-around to look back at your yoke to find the small print on the chart where it states the procedure, to confirm that I am doing the correct thing, turning and twisting close to the ground. Sometimes it is really "nuts" and that is where the expression came from.
For me, the "Amsterdam" straight ahead is the least complicated...even I can remember...and yes, I if I could make the procedure, this would be my thing.
You and SV pointed out correctly that there is other traffic you have to deal with. In these scenario's comes in my option nr:2
-Straight ahead, xxx ft (and please, make it an easy to remember number...) OR
-Straight ahead, 5 DME
.....before we have to think about making a turn..
Leading right away to your question...
"when was the last time you flew the full missed approach (or made an aircraft follow it) except for training. In most cases you'll either be vectored back into the circuit or be given different instructions"
I have not made a missed approach for real in the last 1 1/2 or 2 years. This is also exactly why I wondered about the complexity of some missed approaches. It is an unusual thing for us to get into, as well as the reason that I state "noise abatement is not a good excuse" (because for the few to be flown, you should not compomise safety!)
In the cases that I flew the missed approach, I did receive radar vector and altitude which is a great relief my side. (and an extra stress yours.. <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> )
The non-paired DME, yes, a mistery, but you might well be right that the book says so. But you may understand that I think it is odd.
But thank you for the clarification! As I said before, I life and learn and ask a whole bunch of stupid questions, because I am just curious and don't understand that flying can be made so difficult. I think the practical way, not the theoretical...
S V
Also thanks for your comment. I have heard the "TERPS" and think it might be a booklet that I read with just as much difficulty as the contracts written by layers...
As you say, a lot of guidelines, specially about the "don't-s"
I was wondering if there was a specific organization like IATA or similar that was checking up on the procedures, because it needs to be a combined effort from controllers and pilots making the procedure.
In my opinion, a missed approach that takes longer than 10 seconds to explain, is not good and I am surprized that no pilot organization is/was involved.
Again, all of you, thanx, and keep up the good work!
Greetings
MEL