Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Timely Go-Arounds

Old 14th Jul 2019, 09:53
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 80
What happens if you’re PIC in the left seat and a check captain has been called out to operate in the right seat on a normal line flight, they say go around but you disagree and you are PIC, do you continue because you have ultimate authority or is it different?
aussie1234 is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2019, 09:58
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 340
Wow Neville. You’re living in 1970s CRM.

Google Jacob van Zanten... that’s what happens when the Captain decides they know best to the exclusion of the FO.
Slippery_Pete is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2019, 10:24
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 434
And if you have a no-fault policy in your opsman, saying that the go-around can be called by anyone, you shouldn’t have the boss back in the office questioning the go-around.
If you do have a boss that questions it (other than the basic “what happened”) you are likely working for a shit boss/company.

Youve got bigger things to worry about as a Captain. Do the go-around, execute it brilliantly (you should be able to do that!) and show the FOs that there’s no problem going around. If you don’t agree with their call, discuss it later- maybe impart some of your knowledge and experience on them and help them, rather than effectively belittling them.
You never know, maybe they might save your arse or another Capts arse one day because of this experience.

Or be a prick and just do it your way and your way only.
Car RAMROD is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2019, 18:06
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by Car RAMROD View Post
Or be a prick and just do it your way and your way only.
And wonder why your FOs always seem to be going sick.
Slezy9 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 01:32
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,319
So you are on final Captain can clearly see the REIL, PAPI, newish FO can't find the runway in the window, wants to Go Around, the general on concenus on PPRuNe is that we GoAround and probably divert. Cancelled flight, frustrated passengers, Ops are scratching their head because everybody else got in. Is that really where we are at in this day and age?? Captain diverts even though he can see the runway?

neville_nobody is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 01:57
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 434
I’ll flip the question around Neville and throw it back...

FO can clearly see the runway but captain cannot and wants to go around. Do you continue to land or do you go around?

If you go around, why? Is it because it’s your the captain and you are making that decision just because you are boss, or because you aren’t happy that both guys have the same picture and are not on the “same page” any more?

I acknowledge that every situation is different- if you can see them from miles out and the FO is struggling, there might be time to give them the chance. If you are at a few hundred ft in horrendous weather, missed might be the safest option.
The Garuda Capt that overran probably thought he was in the right and being captain probably decided that “no, I’ve got this” despite the FO calling a go around. Do you agree with this situation because, whilst maybe not your intent, this is how many seem to perceive your statement.
Car RAMROD is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 02:07
  #47 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 48
Posts: 181
Neville, I’m not sure of the standard of FO you’re used to flying with. If you feel the need to assess the necessity of every go-around call you hear, then that tells me you are more interested in being right than doing what’s right.
As you are PIC, that is your right and prerogative.

“Go Around” is a call that isn’t issued with great regularity on an individual basis, but when it is, it is said for a reason. The merit of its utterance shouldn’t be your first priority, plenty of time to sort that out after you have safely initiated the manoeuvre. None of that diminishes your command authority..... if anything it would enhance it.

Just my opinion.
34R is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 02:33
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by Judd View Post
An arrogant and childish assertion. Similar to a recent difference of opinion that arose re use of autobrake for landing on a long into-wind dry runway. Company SOP left it to the captain re autobrake use. Basically if autobrake not needed operationally to meet runway length and conditions there was no requirement to use it.
Captain was PF and during approach briefing elected not to use autobrake. The F/O disagreed saying all the captains he flew with use autobrake for ALL landings regardless if operationally necessary or otherwise..
Captain thanked him for his advice and continued with briefing. F/O got twitchy. On short final F/O calls "Go Around" but gave no explanation for late call. The approach seemed normal so the captain queries the call. F/O states " The autobrake is off."
The landing which was stable is continued with F/O later de-briefed. Common sense prevailed
Ok, I probably wouldn't be happy with an FO calling go around on a previously briefed point, but the captain is in the wrong here. "GO AROUND" is not a question. Its hopefully not written in any SOP anywhere that it is the captain's discretion to ignore it.

The FO could have been totally happy with the brakes, but got view of a drone on the approach path. Where would you rather be? Rejoining the pattern and landing safely, or deliberately ignoring a call to go around, and suffering the consequences of such a decision?

Its arrogant and childish to expect of a captain that a go around will be flown when it is called for? The reason should not be a question in that moment.

So you are on final Captain can clearly see the REIL, PAPI, newish FO can't find the runway in the window, wants to Go Around, the general on concenus on PPRuNe is that we GoAround and probably divert. Cancelled flight, frustrated passengers, Ops are scratching their head because everybody else got in. Is that really where we are at in this day and age?? Captain diverts even though he can see the runway?
Where did you pick up your CRM training? That isn't the general consensus on PPRuNe, that is the general consensus in most of the developed world. If you truly think continuing is okay when your FO isn't seeing what you're seeing, then maybe this thread will prompt you to have a good think about the way you operate, because the way your are coming off is downright dangerous.

Last edited by umop apisdn; 15th Jul 2019 at 02:43.
umop apisdn is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 02:46
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,319
FO can clearly see the runway but captain cannot and wants to go around. Do you continue to land or do you go around?
Captain's call at the time. Maybe he/she does go around or maybe they don't. That is my whole point that is getting lost. It is the captains decision. Some calls are not as black and white as some people here wish to believe.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 03:44
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 485
You don’t give your FOs much credit. I hope you’re not one of the captains I fly with!
wishiwasupthere is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 04:31
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
So you are on final Captain can clearly see the REIL, PAPI, newish FO can't find the runway in the window, wants to Go Around, the general on concenus on PPRuNe is that we GoAround and probably divert. Cancelled flight, frustrated passengers, Ops are scratching their head because everybody else got in. Is that really where we are at in this day and age?? Captain diverts even though he can see the runway?
I’m not sure it’s even a realistic scenario. If the vis is that marginal, you’d expect the Captain to be PF and head free, and the FO to be PM and head down (at least where I work).
And if everything was so clear to the Captain but they’ve gone around, why would they then ‘probably divert’?
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 04:31
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 903
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
hat is my whole point that is getting lost. It is the captains decision.
Your 'point' isn't being lost. Its clear as crystal. The issue is that your point is absurd, not coincident with airline procedures anywhere in the developed world and objectively dangerous.

Why you are wrong has been explained to you over and over, with examples provided by a chorus of people here yet you have acknowledged none of it, insisting instead upon your assertion despite it being backed up by no SOP known to anyone in this country, or common sense.

I don't know whats more worrying; that you maintain this belief or that you've demonstrated a personality so incredibly resistant to acknowledging and accepting when you are wrong that you cannot be told. Neither are qualities I want anywhere near me on a flight deck, let alone in command of a few hundred people.
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 06:32
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 596
If i'v missed it in the postings apologies - but have we defined the heights and circumstances attached to a "Go Around" call??
If you're doing an approach in bad weather then the potential for a missed approach/go around has been briefed, it's posible a go around could be called BEFORE the minima if hand flying or raw data and out of tolerance.

Thing that gets me is:
- "go around" + no reason = confusion
-"go around" + reason (probably reason then "go around") = understanding

(73NG) if we're at 700' in visual conditions and F/O notices a gear unsafe condition ie a main gear green light is blank and his first reaction is "go around" my first quetion will be "what do the overhead gear lights show", if he say "all green" should I go around because of his forgetfullness of the landing gear indication system??

Due experience and flying in the "real asmosphere" I understand catching a trend rather than an actual speed in gusty conditions, slow to pull off thrust with speed increase but fast to add power with speed decrease, substandard training in SIMs and crappy conforming instructors make too many think the airspeed will NEVER change regardless of the actual wind conditions.
If I'm within nav tolerances on finals but the wind is causing speed fluctuations - which are being corrected - but out of stable approach criteria AT TIMES and the F/O calls out "go around" should I go around??

Appears consensus is that at any time/height someone says "go around" without explanation you don't question, you just do - and as above that's rubbish.
The criteria need to be refined/re-defined, authority of the PIC to use his experience and commonsense (when applicable) needs to be incorperated and I'd suggest companies/ops manuals state clearly that IF a Captain ignores calls and the aircraft is clearly in a potentially dangerous position the copilot will be thrown in gaol if he DOESN'T take over to ensure the safety of the aircraft, assuming he survives any subsequent accident.
galdian is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 06:47
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Die Suddetenland
Posts: 114
Why are pilots so afraid of a Go Around?

The time you save, could be an eternity.

PS Neville, no offense, but you are way out of step with general good CRM. FO calls Go Around - how do you absolutely know you didn't see something they did. Beware of hubris.
Oriana is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 06:56
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 903
Originally Posted by galdian View Post
If i'v missed it in the postings apologies - but have we defined the heights and circumstances attached to a "Go Around" call??
If you're doing an approach in bad weather then the potential for a missed approach/go around has been briefed, it's posible a go around could be called BEFORE the minima if hand flying or raw data and out of tolerance.

Thing that gets me is:
- "go around" + no reason = confusion
-"go around" + reason (probably reason then "go around") = understanding
What on earth are you on about. How can there be any confusion about "Go around". Its as simple as it gets. Go around. Now you want to introduce a discussion into this time critical flight phase? Thats going to 'clear up the confusion' ?

Originally Posted by galdian View Post
](73NG) if we're at 700' in visual conditions and F/O notices a gear unsafe condition ie a main gear green light is blank and his first reaction is "go around" my first quetion will be "what do the overhead gear lights show", if he say "all green" should I go around because of his forgetfullness of the landing gear indication system??
So, we're at 700 ft when suddenly we're going to start systems troubleshooting and having a discussion. Under that time pressure, what happens when in a rush and confused as to why you want to have a debate, he/she misreads the overhead gear indication and you end up landing gear unsafe? What do you say to the coroner when asked why you didn't comply with the FO's Go Around call?

Originally Posted by galdian View Post
Due experience and flying in the "real asmosphere" I understand catching a trend rather than an actual speed in gusty conditions, slow to pull off thrust with speed increase but fast to add power with speed decrease, substandard training in SIMs and crappy conforming instructors make too many think the airspeed will NEVER change regardless of the actual wind conditions.
If I'm within nav tolerances on finals but the wind is causing speed fluctuations - which are being corrected - but out of stable approach criteria AT TIMES and the F/O calls out "go around" should I go around??
Depends on what your ops manual says. Are temporary excursions permitted? If so, this should have been briefed as part of the arrival. "Due to the significant turbulence on final, call me on sustained deviations only. Do you have any questions or complaints about this?"

Originally Posted by galdian View Post
Appears consensus is that at any time/height someone says "go around" without explanation you don't question, you just do - and as above that's rubbish.
So much rubbish that its literally SOP at every airline in the developed world.

Originally Posted by galdian View Post
The criteria need to be refined/re-defined, authority of the PIC to use his experience and commonsense (when applicable) needs to be incorperated and I'd suggest companies/ops manuals state clearly that IF a Captain ignores calls and the aircraft is clearly in a potentially dangerous position the copilot will be thrown in gaol if he DOESN'T take over to ensure the safety of the aircraft, assuming he survives any subsequent accident.
So hold on, above youre making a case for the Captain to be able to ignore FO calls of a GA if he/she thinks the call spurious. Now you state however that the FO should be put in jail if they don't take over to prevent an unsafe situation. The entire reason why the FO called GA was for precisely that situation! This literally makes no sense.

I honestly don't understand how people are getting this so wrong. How many hulls needs to be smashed into the ground before some people recognize that it takes 2 people to operate these aircraft, and both of them must be happy and satisfied to continue with a landing. What is the cost of a go around, vs pushing on in an unsafe condition. Because I assure you, in every single case where a Captain has flown the thing into the ground despite the FO's please, at that time, the Captain thought he knew better, just like above.
So when an FO calls go around, your first response is to ask why? Do you think this is a good time to have a discussion? How much time do you allocate for this discussion?
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 07:45
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 596
I think you've misread and misunderstood my intent, I just don't think that a go around call AT ANY TIME needs to be blindly followed, that there are a bunch of factors that MAY come into play due different situations/circumstances.

One thing I WILL reiterate, in many cultures there will be a reluctance for F/O's to physically take over even if stated in manuals so why not ram it down their throat that they'll be going to jail if they DON'T physically take over or something similar??
The example I was getting at was if the captains hot and high ie the aircraft is ALREADY in a dangerous scenario and will CONTINUE to be hot and high in many cultures the F/O's will still not physically take over.
Maybe addressing that aspect a worthy consideration as well, any number of accidents THAT would have prevented.

I just don't think you can continue to keep dumbing down things in aviation and trying to make a "one size fits all" scenario, we deal in a dynamic and ever changing environment and less pilots coming through these days are encouraged to realise or understand this.
Just IMHO of course.
galdian is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 07:49
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 903
Which bit did I misread? I replied in detail specifically to every point you made. What part was wrong?
das Uber Soldat is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 08:08
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,700
Blind or rigid adherance to standard calls, and nothing but, can have a downside.
If I want my co-pilot to go around - and time permits - I will give a reason. e.g. 'Unstable - Go Around" or "Not visual - Go Around" or perhaps something does not seem right like "that aircraft ahead is not going to clear the runway - go around". In such cases I would expect the go around to be executed, and if not, would take control.
In Judd's example - assuming that the F/O had been properly briefed that the Captain did not intend to use autobrake - any objection should have been raised by the F/O immediately, not evinced in a "go around" call on final approach. Had the call been amplified with "we don't have autobrake...go around" it is understandable that some Captains would continue. I probably would continue on the basis that the F/O had paid no attention to the briefing, but would at least acknowledge with "autobrake not required".
Perhaps if said F/O was smart (or simply playing smart ass), maybe he could have said "checklist is not complete...go around". Depending on whether autobrake was optional or mandatory would determine the tone of the subsequent debrief. If it was mandatory I would thank him for saving me embarrassment. If it was optional he would be told firmly to listen up next time.
But should any Captain ignore a bald "go around" call? ...nope, time enough later for the other pilot to give his/her reasons. As others have said, anything is preferable to a smoking hole in the ground.
There are fairly rare occasions when time does not permit amplification - like almost in the flare and drifting too far off the centreline, or loss of visibility below minima (as in the OP here) - when the command must be issued clearly in two words and immediately executed, regardless of who makes the call and who is flying..
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 08:23
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 596
Well - if someone tells me to do something without telling me why maybe confusing's the wrong word - but certainly doesn't provide enough info to improve my big picture, situational awareness and understanding.

If you're at a safe height why NOT ask a question or two to understand WHY the call's been made? You can still do the go around, you're not saying "no'.
You're saying all go around calls are always time critical, I disagree.

Fair point about briefing what's obvious to me re gusty aproaches but maybe not obvious to others.

You have chosen to ignore the point I make about the reluctance for F/O's to physically take over even after I clarified the aircraft was ALREADY in a dangerous scenario, sort out that little part of the puzzle and you WILL stop aircraft accidents.

Finally at what stage did I ever say I wouldn't do the go around?

It may be "the law" in most if not all manuals, doesn't mean that the paramaters and criteria couldn't be better defined and I just can't see how the mantra of making one call completely eliminates ANY input from experience and judgement and (the lost arts of) big picture and situational awarness.

Cheers.





galdian is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2019, 08:38
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by galdian View Post
Well - if someone tells me to do something without telling me why maybe confusing's the wrong word - but certainly doesn't provide enough info to improve my big picture, situational awareness and understanding.

If you're at a safe height why NOT ask a question or two to understand WHY the call's been made?
IMHO any discussion should’ve already happened. E.g. ‘I don’t think we’ll be stable by 500’ or ‘Looks like a tractor’s about to cross the runway’ or whatever. Once someone says ‘Go Round’ (and I don’t care if it’s a junior SO) then discussion ends and we just get on with it. We can talk about the reasons later if we need to.
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.