View Full Version : GO Around / descent now !!!

5th Sep 2007, 20:20
Hmmm !! Any views on this.
I tried to find the JEP plate on the Internet for ILS 27 at Le Bourget - but now luck.
Before approach a couple of days ago - I got the the approach briefing from PF and I was PNF.
He came to the missed approach part and told me he intented to continue down to a 1000 feet even if we where unestablised at 2000 feet, before commencing the missed approach.
1000 feet was on the plate indeed, but I would say it is climb to 1000 feet from DA and then turn.
My point is if you are unestablised at 2000 feet in IMC - being unestablised means you no longer are where you should be.
So decending on what - try to catch the LOC or GS - !!! And then go around.
He told me that several crews had got it wrong in the SIM - doing a GA from higher than 1000 feet.
Some places a distance must be obtained before any turn - but in a case like this I would maintain altitude and wait for DME distance to be obtained.
What I do from time to time (or first leg of the day) is to brief me and my colleque on the GA procedure - Apply GA thrust - rotate to GA att - Flaps 20 - Positive rate/ Gear up - 1000 feet flaps up and CL Thr.
Now !! I see a problem here - my GA procedure is reflex and my first reaction would be to apply GA Thr. It would be pretty bad to end your carreer in the dirt at LFPB trying to decend from 2000 feet to 1000 feet on GA Thr.
Thanks and Regards. Twin2040

6th Sep 2007, 02:22
Crazy. Why would you continue to descend towards the ground when executing a manoeuvre that is designed to get you safely away from the ground?

6th Sep 2007, 03:57
Seems quite clear in the AIP:

http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/aip/enligne/PDF_AIPparSSection/IAC/AD/2/0710_AD%202.LFPB.pdf (page 21)

6th Sep 2007, 07:26
Thanks guys. I do not read any French, but I see 1000 and 2000 feet and 2,5 BT. Anybody able to translate. Thanks. Twin2040

6th Sep 2007, 07:53
Climb STRAIGHT AHEAD to 1000'. At D2.5 BT turn LEFT onto 254o climbing to 2000'. At D6.0 Bt....blah blah blah.

I think the question related to what if you initiate GA at say 1800' for whatever reason, say loss on LOC/GS etc.
Normally you are still with CDG Radar, but you might ju st be on PLB tower.
Then the GA not a problem re altitude, but the early climb from 1880'to 2000' will severly compromise CDG traffic when you turn onto the route 4 or 5 miles early.

Aeroscat: I believe the GA is based on a 200ft ish decision height "point", and to continue towards that point does not compromise my safety, or yours, I suspect. Remember the procedure is designed for all class and type of users.

I appreciate the problem, and perhaps Pierre will advise.


6th Sep 2007, 07:58
It is not all simple climb away at max rate.

How about KLAX where you generally must descent to 2000 ft to clear the light a/c lane above the airport? Don't even think of pushing TOGA!!!

Other airports require tracking to a defined point, then fly the map tracks - YSSY 34L

Read the relevant notams and know the requirements for a missed approach.

6th Sep 2007, 11:47
The missed apch for ILS 07 is even more intriguing. They don't want you to turn before 0.8 DME west of the airport, and not climb above 700' until 2 DME east of the airport. So if you need to G/A once established on the ILS (GS intercept at 2000'), my read is that you are expected to truck on down to 700', level off, wait for the MAP (0,8 DME), turn right, turn right again to intercept an NDB track, and wait for 2 DME before starting the climb to 3000.

A sort of saving grace:the little sentence: "où suivre clairance du contrôle", = "or follow ATC clearance". Jepp translate that "or as directed". Best to have a plan to communicate quickly with ATC if you do go miss on this apch.

By the by, 1 mile to the north, abeam the midpoint of LFPB rwy 07, lies the "marker" for De-Gaulle's ILS 08R, which will be in use when Le Bourget is landing 07. Our colleagues will cross that marker at 2010', so I can understand why TOGAing from ILS 07 and not respecting the 700' max altitude limit might just cause a few ruffled fishfinders.

Have I gotten a few quizzical looks when I briefed this approach ? You bet!


6th Sep 2007, 19:45
Hello again and thanks for the replys. Twin2040

6th Sep 2007, 23:13
Can one really remember all the tiny details of the ILS27 and especially ILS07 missed approach? Not me. By the time I finish briefing, I have forgotten most of it myself.......change track tree or four times and remember just as many alt constrains in a very short amount of time as if I have nothing else to worry about and just sit relaxed on MFS := ......just hope my PM gets it right. Hm, that´s his job after all :}

I reckon those missed approaches were designed with slower aircraft in mind or by someone just flying a desk. I just cant see how one can fly them accuratly in a fast moving jet. Hopefully, I have never to go missed on an IFR day. :}

Capn Bloggs
7th Sep 2007, 02:08
My point is if you are unestablised at 2000 feet in IMC - being unestablised means you no longer are where you should be.

I don't approach it that way. The Stabilised Approach concept was introduced to stop aircraft having landing accidents by landing too fast or long. If you are not landing ie you have already made the decision NOT to land, there is no need to immediately execute a Missed Approach (except to continue on the approach track until you get to the Missed Approach point.

You are legally allowed to proceed along the LLZ, even way above the GP, until the MAPt by following the LLZ procedure (if it's published), then do the missed approach. Provided you are stay above the altitude restrictions for the LLZ approach, you can even keep descending. This may go some way to getting the aircraft "near" the "expected" MAPt below the 1000ft restriction during the Missed Approach.

That said, this approach would need to be carefully briefed. :eek:

7th Sep 2007, 07:28
I think the key point in the first post, is that the aircraft is not established on the LLZ (quite why not is not clear!) in which case the answer cannot be to descend to 1000ft under any circumstances.:uhoh:

7th Sep 2007, 08:05
oh dear, this is such an old discussion: in ANY GA you could be in a position where you are higher than an altitude given in the GA procedure. You might have a published GA altitude of 10 000 ft but still you could be somewhere at 12 000ft. The problem is exactly the same.

There have been endless briefings before and after sim and flight sessions about this topic. They all boil down to the point that - depending on a/c type - you should initiate a GA with power setting and configuration change, then go into a shallower climb or even a descent. If you are not configurated yet it might even be wise just to level off and then descent.

It's also wise to talk to ATC before you do something you are not sure.

So far, the Bourget approach doesn't seem very different to me.


low n' slow
9th Sep 2007, 10:52
We do this type of GA each time we go to the sim (our instructor loves it as everyone does wrong, including me). At ESSA, the MAP altitude on 01L is 1500 feet and the initial altitude on the ILS for that runway is 2500 feet (?). If we need to go around from before reaching 1500, we do not initiate the GA procedure with Full power and so on. We just pull up the gear and flaps and retard power a little. The reason for us having to descend is that when runway 01L is in use for landning, they have northerly SID's that cross the MAP above. So being at 1500 feet is vital to maintain traffic separation. I can see this being the reason for the Le Bourget arrival also (although I've never been there, it sounds logical to me).

As for descending whilst not established on the LOC, that sort of puts a twist to it all. I don't know what to do about that. You can't pull the parking brake and you can't continue on you're present level and you can't descend... tricky one really. Thanks for giving me a good question to ask my instructor on the next OPC!


9th Sep 2007, 12:27
After my brash first post, I now see that there can be circumstances where you may have to descend during a go-around. I guess if you are unsure of your position then you need to get to a minimum safe altitude. If you are already above MSA then you could at least continue descent to the MSA, or if below it, initiate a climb to it. But I think it'd be wise to get on the radio fairly smart to explain the problem to ATC to allow them to either vector you or others around you. Following that old faithful "Aviate, navigate, communicate", in that situation it is necessary to communicate early in order to navigate safely!

In the cases where you are going around for a reason other than losing the LLZ, then I agree you should descend to the altitude given in the missed approach.

The ultimate answer may be "it depends."