Going around
May I ask a question...perhaps questions.....
I'm a retired legal academic with some researched learned-journal publications in the use and misuse of criminal law in the context of aviation safety. I also have some hours (till ended to my utmost frustration by illness) of pilot training in Cessna 152s and Tomahawks, and I read in, maintain, and add to a modest personal library on aviation. Thus, I entertain the hope and conceit that I understand enough not to sound utterly kyber-ish -- see post 32. Forgive me for intruding, for I may overestimate myself...... I hope I'm not out of order.
The background to my question is this. While working with a senior captain with airline safety responsibilities on a jointly-written published paper, he drew my attention to a policy in which it would normally not be necessary to report a go-around if eg an unsatisfactory approach was being abandoned. His view was that this should be seen as the normal conduct of conscientious pilots from which there is, as a general rule, little new to be learned from a report. The argument, as I understood the matter, is that it serves safety better to encourage pilots to be self-critical and to go around sooner rather than later, rather than to distract them with the prospect of an invitation to tea and biscuits (is that the correct euphemism?) merely because they did what they are trained and expected to do, which is the execution of a routine, normal and safe landing.
I have absolutely no knowledge of AF's (or any other airline's) policies and so make no comment. I also do not know whether IFALPA has addressed the matter (I haven't checked).
I'm impressed by the unanimity of the reactions in this thread. I'd be interested, accordingly, to read PPruners' thoughts: is it possible that there was an initial reluctance to go around because this would have entailed exposing one's self to managerial scrutiny and critical comment? To what extent has the policy referred to above been developed and applied anywhere? What is the current general practice, or does this vary from one airline to another? Is there any prevailing operational culture which either contributes to, or detracts from, safety?
On a slightly different angle, would ATC have made any contribution to this incident, and would this have increased any reluctance on the part of the pilots to go around because a report might have exposed ATC staff?
I hasten to add that I make this enquiry purely because I have maintained my personal, "hobby" interest in aviation safety and law, and not for any formal research or publication purposes whatever. Being retired, nobody is likely to be interested in my views anyway.