Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

LFPB RWY 07 go-around

Old 15th Oct 2020, 08:56
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 375
Originally Posted by FZRA View Post
On my last type, hitting TOGA would disconnect the AP. Aircraft limitation was 700í AGL for AP engagement whereas this is 480í AGL. Something to bear in mind when briefing modes? Weíre talking technicalities here (funny cos the AP can remain engaged normally down to 80í) but itís worth thinking about.
Yes, a good point and certainly worth considering.
733driver is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 09:42
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by 733driver View Post
Mind telling me what you fly? I'm just curious.
A Citation 560 with original Honeywell Primus avionics and FMS. The approach plate only calls for "RNAV 1" capability (because otherwise one could probably not fly to LORNI and hold there). So I guess that differently from what I wrote above our FMS will not have CLM as single fix of the missed approach procedure but LORNI.
what next is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 09:49
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Jersey
Posts: 39
Interesting though that if you look at the VOR approach the missed approach instructions are:MISSED APCH: Climb on R-248 inbound to BT VOR. At BT VOR turn RIGHT to intercept and follow R-110 BT to CLM VOR climbing to 3000', or as directed. MAX 185 KT. Climb to 1100' prior to level acceleration.

i.e start climbing immediately from the MDA of 590'. There is no mention of the 21D CLM as a climb restraint.


PaulH1 is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 10:19
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 375
Originally Posted by what next View Post
A Citation 560 with original Honeywell Primus avionics and FMS. The approach plate only calls for "RNAV 1" capability (because otherwise one could probably not fly to LORNI and hold there). So I guess that differently from what I wrote above our FMS will not have CLM as single fix of the missed approach procedure but LORNI.
Interesting. Thanks.
733driver is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 10:24
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: South of the Watford Gap, East of Portland
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by 3RDi View Post
Never considered briefing a missed approach a waste of time personally, complex or not. But always discussed alternative options available to us; in the event of...
I didn't say briefing the MAP was a waste of time and it has to be done - but when in a very large percentage of cases ATC tell you to fly a MAP a simple as 'straight ahead to 3000' all that has precede that is wasted.

Each airport's preferred policy on MAP - either 'expect to fly as per the published' or ' MAP will be passed by ATC' could be stated on the plate.
judge11 is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 11:46
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Gernany
Posts: 483
FWIW, I have come across a few colleagues who had to fly the MAP from runway 07 and were denied vectors, they had to follow the published procedure. I do not remember whether they actually descended or not or whether they went around from below 700ft MSL.
EatMyShorts! is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2020, 17:51
  #27 (permalink)  

ECON cruise, LR cruise...
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 48
Posts: 566
Had a W/S at around 500ft RW27 - got it in hand and levelled at 1.000ft - problem came when they tried to vector us, without passing an amended altitude. We had not yet passed D1.0 from BT, so were still level at 1.000. Politely asked if that was the ATCO's intention - followed by a very agitated instruction to climb to altitude 3.000ft. ;-)

So they get caught out by it, too - worth remembering that ATCOs are human too and are just as 'sprung' as we are by an unexpected missed approach.
Empty Cruise is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2020, 08:46
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: europe
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by EatMyShorts! View Post
It would be bad airmanship to descend to such a low altitude in IMC. I won't be doing this.
How do yo do an approach to the minima if you find it dangerous to descend to 700 feet?
arketip is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2020, 16:48
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: England
Posts: 13
How on Earth could anyone argue that it's even remotely safe to fly for 21 miles at 700ft (at one point 480ft AGL), potentially in IMC with no autopilot? That's madness.
tigerinthenight is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2020, 16:57
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 581
Errr - cos they're not? D21 CLM is approximately 2 miles from Le Bourget, probaly three from the MAPt.
BizJetJock is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2020, 10:20
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Gernany
Posts: 483
Originally Posted by arketip View Post
How do yo do an approach to the minima if you find it dangerous to descend to 700 feet?
Going around means climbing to a safe altitude as quickly as possible. 480ft AGL are not safe.
EatMyShorts! is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2020, 17:25
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: europe
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by EatMyShorts! View Post
Going around means climbing to a safe altitude as quickly as possible. 480ft AGL are not safe.
Does it, really?

Do you mean that if you are on a go around you are allowed to disregard procedures, altitude restrictions, published track, potentially cause conflicts with other aircraft, maybe causing other to go arounds or take evasive actions?

Do you consider a go around an emergency?
arketip is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2020, 17:34
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 941
Hello!

Originally Posted by arketip View Post
Do you consider a go around an emergency?
No, but I (as probably many others as well) are usually better prepaired for an emergency than for a two-engines operational go-around. The emergencies get trained hands-on twice per year in the simulator and/or on checkrides in the plane. A real go-around ocuurs (in my typical flying) once every two or three years only. If, statistically, I am handling pilot every second time that means that I fly a real go-around once every five years. So these procedures should be designed as safe as possible because few pilots are really current in actually flying them.
what next is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2020, 21:44
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Gernany
Posts: 483
Originally Posted by arketip View Post
Does it, really?

Do you mean that if you are on a go around you are allowed to disregard procedures, altitude restrictions, published track, potentially cause conflicts with other aircraft, maybe causing other to go arounds or take evasive actions?
You do it your way, I do it my way. I will NOT descend during a missed approach in IMC, it's not going to happen. I will maintain my last altitude, but that's it.
EatMyShorts! is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2020, 23:02
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Near the sun
Posts: 873
Originally Posted by EatMyShorts! View Post
You do it your way, I do it my way. I will NOT descend during a missed approach in IMC, it's not going to happen. I will maintain my last altitude, but that's it.
i donít see the big deal in descending. You mention the challenge posed by a 2 engines G/A. Thatís ok but in this case thatís not what you would do.

Nicely established on the ILS, if high enough, you would set 700í, deselect the G/S ( and use V/S ? ) until the altitude is captured. Not rush, no full thrust, just a continuation of what you were doing. Then as you have the alt captured, increase thrust ( no requirement to go full TOGA ), flaps L, gear and the appropriate lateral mode.

Disregarding a published procedure in a non emergency situation is quite troubling.

If you are not sure how to do this safely, perhaps you could ask to practice it during your next sim session. Probably more useful than doing the usual box ticking profile in my view.

AMEX is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2020, 13:35
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: World
Posts: 2,158
95% of the times this would be a discontinued approach flown from above missed approach altitude, NOT a go around.
No need for go around thrust. Select the appropriate vs, descent to 700 and fly the procedure, no big deal if properly briefed.
Extend the centerline and youíll see what can happen if you dont stick to the procedure with cdg on eastern configuration as well.

I could potentially see the problem with a balked landing on two engines, but again, an average pilot with a proper briefing should be able to deal with it without sweating too much.
dirk85 is online now  
Old 18th Oct 2020, 16:59
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 304
You are not supposed to fly close to the ground without seeing it Except when necessary for take-off or landing, or except when specifically authorised by the competent authority,(SERA 5015)
I assume that a published procedure is such and authority, but yes it's tricky to level off and fly without an autopilot, at 500ft AGL, while fidgeting with the FMS to activate the go around procedure, and without the ground in sight. At each sim session I practice it again and again, with an unnoticed engine failure while descending it's even better.
172510 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

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