ASR for go arounds

[toothpaste67]

Hi guys, what do you think of the practice that the captn has to file an ASR whenever the crew does a go around? - I think some people will just try to save an unstabilised approach in order to avoid the paperwork.

[No_Speed_Restriction]

Errr.....No, I dont think so somehow. Now, back to planet earth.

[Spearing Britney]

Yes maybe they will, but in a good safety culture they will feel able to report all events (their fault or not) freely and it allows the management to monitor trends and react if, for example, a particular airport or approach is causing a lot of GA's...

Not a bad idea having a log of all GA's imho.

[catchup]

the captn HAS to file an ASR

For my opinion, this is contraproductiv for air safety.

regards

[No_Speed_Restriction]

Agreed. expect one would hope that the majority of GA's would be WX related and not GPWS.

[toothpaste67]

Thanks for the info!

[Max Angle]

We are required to file an ASR at bmi if we go-around for any reason, I am pleased to say that the culture we have means that I have no inhibition about either going around or reporting it afterwards regardless of the reason. The company have made it very clear that they would far rather you fly a g/a than continue with an approach that you are unhappy with but that they would like to know the circumstances, I do not have a problem with that.

[Morpheme]

studi

It is a standard manouver but often gets screwed up by the fact that an individual crew member would rarely perform one in usual line flying. In the sim the go-around is usually practised from minimums - in practice on the line it is more akin to a broken off approach than a full, balls-out go around, and as there is no separate procedure for this, problems sometimes occur.

Our company insists on an ASR (wisely, IMHO) for every go-around - it produces a culture of reporting as mentioned above, and those events that do cause problems can be retrained properly in the sim at the bloke's next check.

[Pinky95]

Well I haven't heard about writing an ASR for a Go Around in my company yet... haven't been there that long though.

The thing is the people on the ground know it immediatly when you press the TO/GA button, spyware on planes!

[B737NG]

Our company had a policy to submitt a Report for G/A... not to loose face it was seldom done, the G/A and we lost hull and a lot of demage happend. Now we just do a G/A if required and the saftey margin is increased dramaticaly.
No paper needed at all. If there was a serious incident we know thru our monitoring system what caused the problem and we can pull the crew. Big brother is watching-mentality.......

NG

[Captain Stable]

As has been pointed out, a go-around is a perfectly simple manoeuvre. However, that is not what makes its execution a requirement to file an ASR. It is the reasons that the go-around was carried out that help others in the company or the fleet (or elsewhere).

Hence, I recently filed an ASR when I told my FO to go-around when he allowed the aircraft to float after a hot and high approach in a cross-wind to a downward-sloping runway. We were positioning empty, so I had decided to let him discover the results for himself rather than being told - far better instructional technique at times! Also, if one only ever carries out a go-around in the sim at 6-monthly intervals, the mind tends to relax when flying the line.

[BANANASBANANAS]

In my mob an MOR is required for 'A Go Around for reasons other than weather.' I filed one a few weeks ago as we were on short final and the aircraft ahead that had just landed spent a lot longer than I or ATC thought reasonable on the runway.

So far no feedback from my company so I am quite happy to continue with our existing system.

[Captain Stable]

I have deleted two posts from here and threadbanned the poster for being stupid enough to criticise the actions of others without knowing the full facts, as well as not taking the hint the first time.

[bluepilot]

KLM requires an ASR to be filed for a go-around below 1000' AGL, but excludes go-arounds due to weather.

The aircraft have monitoring systems fitted, any exceedences would be flagged anyway and if excessive the crew asked to give reasons. This is not to spy on the Pilots but to create a safety aware airline and monitor trends.

[Bealzebub]

Good example of CRM then captain stable ?

Did the "others" post the "full facts". If not how could the respondant conceivably know what they were ? Is it possible that daring to criticise indulgent actions has perhaps unfairly raised the ire of "others".

Of course it is your call, but I suspect more than one eyebrow was raised, and excluding someone from taking an opposing viewpoint to "others" rather limits the discussion.

I cannot give an accurate assesment, but I rather suspect there wouldn't be much content on this board if posters were excluded for posting without knowing the "full facts".

[Captain Stable]

I cannot give an accurate assesment, but I rather suspect there wouldn't be much content on this board if posters were excluded for posting without knowing the "full facts".Sure, and a fair point well put. However, the tone of the posts was not one to enquire further, but to have come to a decision without being in full possession of the facts. If anyone wants to disagree with the viewpoint of any poster here, they are free to do so, but I am not prepared to put up with any insults thrown at anyone here.