ShyTorque
True, this was not a jet following and it doesn't hold water in this situation so I apologise. I was merely trying to illustrate that whatever the reason an ATCO gives a go around instruction and then amends it, he/she has a bloody good reason to do so. Just interested in your view from either side of the mike.
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
If necessary, the second, faster go-around could extend up wind to gain better circuit spacing, allowing the first to continue onto a normal, second circuit, hopefully to land without further ado.
As someone earlier pointed out. This traffic was IFR on a visual approach. If it went around, on returning to radar it could well ask and be fully entitled to a RIS or even a RAS. The workload of the Radar Controller would probably have gone throught the roof (lots of primary returns around the airfield) to provide the required seperation. I believe possible TRM was already at work here by the TWR controller not wanting the IFR to go around, therefore unneccesarily increasing the workload.