Reason for Going-Around
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the crux of it is that the pilots training and SOP's dictates that we don't answer you until we are safe and all the aviating out of the way.
ATC view is that we are less proffessional not answering but in pilot terms we are more proffessional because we put flying the machine first.
I really can't imagine post incident a pilot being taken to task for not answering you. I could well imagine the CP and head of training saying well done for not being distracted by ATC.
And your not coming across as a grumpy old man just one that is frustrated because two groups have different SOP's for the same situation and one group is truely international and it would be nearly impossible to change the way they do things.
This whole issue needs someone outside both camps to sit down have a look at the statistics. Look at what factors are going to increase the risk and what actions are going to improve surviability.
I will admit that I am very much in one camp but looking at the case studys which most pilots do. By far the most likely cause of an accident is pilots loosing thier SA and plough into the ground. Incidents that can in there completeness be put down to mechanical reasons are only 20%. It usually has the crew (and I include ATC in the crew as well) cocking it up at some point.
Statistiques diverses
Nearly 70% of accidents are by human error and 50% during the landing phase.
Out of the 130,000 fatalities since the statistics started 91,000 are due to human factors. And very few of them are actually on the airfield after an incident in flight. Although by far the biggest fatal accident is still Teneriffe.
Everything I have seen and been trained about suggests that minimising crew distraction and maximising thier SA has far more affect increasing the safety of a flight or incident than any other factor. So although you think that having the reason and getting the emergency services geared up saves lives your actually increasing the likely hood of lives being lost you have taken the incident from a mechanical one into a human factors one which as we know you are 3.5 and half time more likely to have a fatality off. And to make matters worse they are more likely to be lost off airfield where all the resources are.
ATC view is that we are less proffessional not answering but in pilot terms we are more proffessional because we put flying the machine first.
I really can't imagine post incident a pilot being taken to task for not answering you. I could well imagine the CP and head of training saying well done for not being distracted by ATC.
And your not coming across as a grumpy old man just one that is frustrated because two groups have different SOP's for the same situation and one group is truely international and it would be nearly impossible to change the way they do things.
This whole issue needs someone outside both camps to sit down have a look at the statistics. Look at what factors are going to increase the risk and what actions are going to improve surviability.
I will admit that I am very much in one camp but looking at the case studys which most pilots do. By far the most likely cause of an accident is pilots loosing thier SA and plough into the ground. Incidents that can in there completeness be put down to mechanical reasons are only 20%. It usually has the crew (and I include ATC in the crew as well) cocking it up at some point.
Statistiques diverses
Nearly 70% of accidents are by human error and 50% during the landing phase.
Out of the 130,000 fatalities since the statistics started 91,000 are due to human factors. And very few of them are actually on the airfield after an incident in flight. Although by far the biggest fatal accident is still Teneriffe.
Everything I have seen and been trained about suggests that minimising crew distraction and maximising thier SA has far more affect increasing the safety of a flight or incident than any other factor. So although you think that having the reason and getting the emergency services geared up saves lives your actually increasing the likely hood of lives being lost you have taken the incident from a mechanical one into a human factors one which as we know you are 3.5 and half time more likely to have a fatality off. And to make matters worse they are more likely to be lost off airfield where all the resources are.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So far we have all focused on the needs of both parties to get their respective jobs done, in the case of a go-around.
I wonder if you will all allow me to propose a possible solution, as I feel that discussing solutions is useful.....
The pilot(s) know why they are initiating a go-around, so why not just report that in the same report of ".....going around due xxx."
A lot of ATC units have instant playback of RTF calls, so the ATCO would be able to listen to the call again and again, if he/she missed it and would save asking the pilots. Then when the pilot(s) has the aircraft under control and cockpit workload permits, a dialogue for a solution can be discussed between ATCO and pilot.
This is just my 2ps worth........please feel free to comment or add your own possible solutions!!
I wonder if you will all allow me to propose a possible solution, as I feel that discussing solutions is useful.....
The pilot(s) know why they are initiating a go-around, so why not just report that in the same report of ".....going around due xxx."
A lot of ATC units have instant playback of RTF calls, so the ATCO would be able to listen to the call again and again, if he/she missed it and would save asking the pilots. Then when the pilot(s) has the aircraft under control and cockpit workload permits, a dialogue for a solution can be discussed between ATCO and pilot.
This is just my 2ps worth........please feel free to comment or add your own possible solutions!!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try doing a running commentary as you drive your car - say outloud what you are seeing, thinking and doing.
You will find that it is quite easy whilst things are going well, but when the situation gets more demanding you will dry-up. Now impagine that as part of your evasive manouver (for a car pulling out of a side road in front of you) that you need to make that commentary whilst you are looking for an escape route and steering / braking the car. It just ain't going to happen. You will only be able to add the commentary after you miss the idiot and get "straight and level" again.
Same thing for me driving a heli. Only it's a far more mentally demanding environment in my single-engined unstablised cab than driving a car. That's why you won't get anything more than basic until I have mental capacity and time to do something else.
Seems to me that the best solution is for pilots to spend some time in control rooms and for ATCs to spend some time in the cab. That way we really will understand each others needs a little more.
You will find that it is quite easy whilst things are going well, but when the situation gets more demanding you will dry-up. Now impagine that as part of your evasive manouver (for a car pulling out of a side road in front of you) that you need to make that commentary whilst you are looking for an escape route and steering / braking the car. It just ain't going to happen. You will only be able to add the commentary after you miss the idiot and get "straight and level" again.
Same thing for me driving a heli. Only it's a far more mentally demanding environment in my single-engined unstablised cab than driving a car. That's why you won't get anything more than basic until I have mental capacity and time to do something else.
Seems to me that the best solution is for pilots to spend some time in control rooms and for ATCs to spend some time in the cab. That way we really will understand each others needs a little more.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me that the best solution is for pilots to spend some time in control rooms and for ATCs to spend some time in the cab. That way we really will understand each others needs a little more.
When you coming to visit?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are anywhere near EGKR I can offer "swaps" - EC120 or R44. I would be very interested to see things from your side.
I did offer a few months (perhaps a year back) got no takers.
John
I did offer a few months (perhaps a year back) got no takers.
John
Naughty but Nice
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Southern England
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First I'd better point out that I'm an Area controller, not Approach or Tower, but I wonder about this... If the reason you went around is something that will affect other aircraft behind you as well (windshear, something on the runway that the controller hasn't seen, sure there must be others but I can't think right now) then it would seem professional to tell ATC so reasonable steps can be taken to stop it happening to others behind you and possibly overloading the controller with many problems at once. For any other reason I would suppose that you should be left to sort yourselves out and tell us when you're good and ready.
I was always taught that even with aircraft in emergency crews should not be bothered but given minimum instructions in order to allow them the time to do what they need to, something I still try to do to this day. There will be things ATC need to know, but mostly the aircrew will tell you when they can. As a supervisor as well though I also know the planning required for not just your possible emergency but all the other domino effect problems that might happen, several agencies will often be pestering us for information that only the pilot knows. Doesn't make it right to bother you though.
This all comes down to the eternal balance between who is in charge with pilots/ATC. As pilots you are, absolutely, totally in charge of what happens with the plane you are flying and your passengers. Unfortunately to ATC you are just one plane with others to sort out too. If your reticence to speak led to others having an incident then I would imagine you would not be keen on that, as the next day it could be you having the incident because another pilot did not speak up. As others have said, more understanding of each others jobs and more liaison in both directions will help us all to help each other.
John R81 I'm sorry that no-one took you up on the offer. Unfortunately I'm a fair way from EGKR and don't deal with Heli's so probably not best for me, but I hope that others do take you up on that and you get to ATC too. I'm going to refresh myself tonight on our visitors policy so that I can try to get some pilots in for a visit - please keep asking.
Cheers,
Northerner
"Keep smiling - it makes people wonder what you're up to..."
I was always taught that even with aircraft in emergency crews should not be bothered but given minimum instructions in order to allow them the time to do what they need to, something I still try to do to this day. There will be things ATC need to know, but mostly the aircrew will tell you when they can. As a supervisor as well though I also know the planning required for not just your possible emergency but all the other domino effect problems that might happen, several agencies will often be pestering us for information that only the pilot knows. Doesn't make it right to bother you though.
This all comes down to the eternal balance between who is in charge with pilots/ATC. As pilots you are, absolutely, totally in charge of what happens with the plane you are flying and your passengers. Unfortunately to ATC you are just one plane with others to sort out too. If your reticence to speak led to others having an incident then I would imagine you would not be keen on that, as the next day it could be you having the incident because another pilot did not speak up. As others have said, more understanding of each others jobs and more liaison in both directions will help us all to help each other.
John R81 I'm sorry that no-one took you up on the offer. Unfortunately I'm a fair way from EGKR and don't deal with Heli's so probably not best for me, but I hope that others do take you up on that and you get to ATC too. I'm going to refresh myself tonight on our visitors policy so that I can try to get some pilots in for a visit - please keep asking.
Cheers,
Northerner
"Keep smiling - it makes people wonder what you're up to..."
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Windshear your not very likely to get anything out of us. Its very intense we are playing with single Knots of airspeed very close to the stall one pilots attention is nailed to the airspeed and attitude and the other one is calling out rates of decent. There are stick shakers going off and all manner of alarms, to be honest we proberly wouldn't hear you.
Neptune that would require every pilot in the world to be retrained to communicate, aviate then navigate. And I really don't think it would improve survival rates or for that matter decrease the number of accidents.
No pilot on this thread has said that we won't speak to you when work load permits, its just that its a growing trend that you want information and demand information when work load doesn't permit. In my discussion post event the units MATZ part 2 was quoted as the reference document that said that the pilot would give ATC the information when asked for it.
This is a very important topic and could well do with some number crunching safety academics having a proper look at the subject. Getting some emprical data into if pilots getting distracted and ATC getting the info in this situation is safer than leaving them alone and getting the information after the crew have sorted the aircraft out and are back on a safe flight profile.
Even if it proves the current status quo of pilots not talking at least it empowers the ATCO to tell who evers asking to knob off and leave them and the pilots in peace. If it proves that it is beneficial and they change our SOP's and training to reflect it I will be more than happy to comply with it.
Neptune that would require every pilot in the world to be retrained to communicate, aviate then navigate. And I really don't think it would improve survival rates or for that matter decrease the number of accidents.
No pilot on this thread has said that we won't speak to you when work load permits, its just that its a growing trend that you want information and demand information when work load doesn't permit. In my discussion post event the units MATZ part 2 was quoted as the reference document that said that the pilot would give ATC the information when asked for it.
This is a very important topic and could well do with some number crunching safety academics having a proper look at the subject. Getting some emprical data into if pilots getting distracted and ATC getting the info in this situation is safer than leaving them alone and getting the information after the crew have sorted the aircraft out and are back on a safe flight profile.
Even if it proves the current status quo of pilots not talking at least it empowers the ATCO to tell who evers asking to knob off and leave them and the pilots in peace. If it proves that it is beneficial and they change our SOP's and training to reflect it I will be more than happy to comply with it.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Mad Jock says.
In any case, all on frequency heard the "going around" call so we know something is wrong ahead of us, even if we don't exactly know what it is. Until we hear why - and find that the reason is not going to affect us (like a technical problem with gear) - we are alert to the increased chance that we will also have to abort the approach.
In short, early information about "why" does not always provide significant extra safety margin to those of us behind. All information is helpful, but the workload of the pilot / crew in an "unusual" situation is significant and (IMHO) takes priority.
NOTE: I fly single engined heli either single or double pilot. I have no experience of large jets, don't have a stick shaker, can't stall (but can VRS and plumet like a stone!!), and I don't fly IFR / IFR approaches so keep in mind my experience / ability when reading my posts.
In any case, all on frequency heard the "going around" call so we know something is wrong ahead of us, even if we don't exactly know what it is. Until we hear why - and find that the reason is not going to affect us (like a technical problem with gear) - we are alert to the increased chance that we will also have to abort the approach.
In short, early information about "why" does not always provide significant extra safety margin to those of us behind. All information is helpful, but the workload of the pilot / crew in an "unusual" situation is significant and (IMHO) takes priority.
NOTE: I fly single engined heli either single or double pilot. I have no experience of large jets, don't have a stick shaker, can't stall (but can VRS and plumet like a stone!!), and I don't fly IFR / IFR approaches so keep in mind my experience / ability when reading my posts.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the fact you are VFR or IFR makes any difference to be honest. And neither does the flying complex machines or puddle jumpers, experenced or none experenced. It will just change how long it takes them to sort themselves out until they have enough capacity to communicate.
The simple fact is that when pilots get over loaded and/or distracted they have a nasty habit of killing themselves and and PAX with them.
The accident at Southend springs to mind with the solo student.
The simple fact is that when pilots get over loaded and/or distracted they have a nasty habit of killing themselves and and PAX with them.
The accident at Southend springs to mind with the solo student.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madrid FIR
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why has this thread generated three pages of posts? It's all very simple if you forget about the ATC niffnaff and trivia, and get back to basics. As has been said so many times before, it's Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. Communicate is last in the list for a reason. Think about it!
In my very early days as a controller a hairy old squadron leader once tried to describe the pilot's workload on go-around. He suggested controllers should get hold of a copy of the missed approach procedure and a copy of an aircraft's go-around checklist. Then suddenly put themselves in an unstable position (he suggested stand on one leg) and go through the checklist with hand and arm movement to simulate resetting throttles and flaps, at the same time reading out the go-around procedure, all without falling over. We tried it, with the SATCO interrupting with questions about our intentions. It was well nigh impossible without missing or confusing items on the checklist, or toppling over (losing control). Try it at the next TRUCE session!
In my very early days as a controller a hairy old squadron leader once tried to describe the pilot's workload on go-around. He suggested controllers should get hold of a copy of the missed approach procedure and a copy of an aircraft's go-around checklist. Then suddenly put themselves in an unstable position (he suggested stand on one leg) and go through the checklist with hand and arm movement to simulate resetting throttles and flaps, at the same time reading out the go-around procedure, all without falling over. We tried it, with the SATCO interrupting with questions about our intentions. It was well nigh impossible without missing or confusing items on the checklist, or toppling over (losing control). Try it at the next TRUCE session!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not surprisingly, I have done quite a few go-arounds. To date, I've not been badgered by ATC as to why but I have been politely asked a few minutes after for the reason. I don't object and many controllers (incorrectly) assume that that may have contributed to the go-around. To date, I have not had a go-around due to an ATC error (if such a word can be used). The finger trouble has all been mine. Too fast, too high, too rushed, not noticing tailwinds - all my mistakes! There have also been quite a few technical malfunctions causing go-arounds. Again, I let ATC know about these, even if just to let them know that I don't need their help and they can carry on reading their newspapers 
.
PM
.PM
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Orbit
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by radarman
Why has this thread generated three pages of posts? It's all very simple if you forget about the ATC niffnaff and trivia, and get back to basics. As has been said so many times before, it's Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. Communicate is last in the list for a reason. Think about it!
The amount of times I cringe on a daily basis at what my colleagues do is increasing rapidly.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
reason for going around
A number of years ago, while being a rookie Tower Ctler, a F27 went around.
I was curious as to why and the pilot politely reported " Python crossing runway". Succeeding aircraft was informed and was cleared to land after python had vacated runway. Both me and the 2nd acft thanked the 1st guy for that immediate info. BTW the python ended up in someones kitchen that nite. It does help sometimes. Those were the days of pioneers, caribous and F27s etc etc etc. Today I am an Approach Radar Ctler and I just wait for the Crew to let me know if at all they want me to know. My 2 cents. Cheers
I was curious as to why and the pilot politely reported " Python crossing runway". Succeeding aircraft was informed and was cleared to land after python had vacated runway. Both me and the 2nd acft thanked the 1st guy for that immediate info. BTW the python ended up in someones kitchen that nite. It does help sometimes. Those were the days of pioneers, caribous and F27s etc etc etc. Today I am an Approach Radar Ctler and I just wait for the Crew to let me know if at all they want me to know. My 2 cents. Cheers
No controller should be caught by surprise by an aircraft going around, although in good weather they're not common, every sequence has been arranged with the possibility of a GA in mind.
Any well trained ATC should know not to talk to crews during high workload situations such as takeoff, landing, and go around / missed approach unless its an emergency situation. It is a requirement here that pilots advise going around (although its certainly not a priority) and my response to that is "roger, when ready report intentions". If its really that serious, he has already called "MAYDAY!"
Here controllers are required to complete 10 hours of flight deck time prior to being issued with an ATC licence, is this not an ICAO requirement?
Any well trained ATC should know not to talk to crews during high workload situations such as takeoff, landing, and go around / missed approach unless its an emergency situation. It is a requirement here that pilots advise going around (although its certainly not a priority) and my response to that is "roger, when ready report intentions". If its really that serious, he has already called "MAYDAY!"
Here controllers are required to complete 10 hours of flight deck time prior to being issued with an ATC licence, is this not an ICAO requirement?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any well trained ATC should know not to talk to crews during high workload situations such as takeoff, landing, and go around / missed approach
Windshear your not very likely to get anything out of us.
I know you are busy but a couple of key words provides sufficient info. Followup later on about the height, severity, type of w/s.
Last edited by sunnySA; 7th Sep 2011 at 12:23. Reason: editorial, typo
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do hope you're not suggesting this means that you don't need to worry about crew workload and can call an aircraft at any time.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can and I will call a/c every time I NEED (to provide safety of course). If pilots are really busy, performing some actions, they can just ignore my message
While I do agree that we need to know the reason for a go around, everything has it's time and place - let the guys get out of whatever trouble they may be in before you start to badger them for non-urgent information. If you feel you can't let the next one make the approach without said info, then a) break them off or b) give them the info you DO have (eg preceeding went around, reason unkown) and let them make their own decision - it's what they're paid to do.
Hmmmmm..... are you one of those guys that insists on giving taxy instructions to a/c whose wheels have JUST touched the runway, I wonder?
classic