Originally Posted by
Sqwak7700
Never more than two when the go-around decision was windshear. And only return for a second approach if there is an improvement. Pretty sure Part A has restrictions on attempting even one approach into known severe windshear.
And a gas-and-go diversion should never be an option when the weather that caused the goaround is still in force. At the very least there should be a trend of improvement. This sort of risk taking is indicative of having profit oriented people in operational decision making roles. Their judgement is impaired and must be questioned. There should be a firewall between management and operational decisions. Most regulatory authorities would be pretty strict against this common practice at CPA.
But you are right into second guessing the crew. We weren't there. We can only guess as to what information was being passed on to the crew by the heros up in IOC. They've already demonstrated that they are happy to put commercial in front of safety, multiple times. So I guess everyone should really question their advise during operational decisions.
Maybe it's better to keep the advise restricted to the operating crew; so the Captain and FO can always turn around and ask the two SOs sitting behind them what they think. After all this is the crew complement chosen by the people giving advise during a typhoon.
Sqwak. Please mate, figure out the difference between 'advise' and 'advice'. Our management are cretins, but they do know how to spell....and it's embarrassing when we can't even accomplish basic grammar. I hold myself to the same standard btw. Thanks.