This is your Captain speaking !!!

[Bagot_Community_Locator]

Today I saw a Boeing airliner initiate a go-around because he was "hot and high" (so he told ATC).

Initially he requested an orbit on final.

I have to admit it was good to see that even the big boys occasionally make mistakes but I wondered how he explained the event to his passengers ??

"Excuse me ladies and gentlemen, I f**ked up"
or was he able to pull out a really good excuse out of his head (perhaps windshear or blame ATC).

Just in case I may need to use that excuse one day !!!!

[ 23 November 2001: Message edited by: Bagot_Community_Locator ]

[Keg]

There has been a bit of airspace closures around DN with us being asked to maintain FL195 to 52 DME DN which is about 6000' high on profile.

Whilst it is certainly manageable and not impossible to deal with, it helps if you have heaps of warning- something you don't always get in DN (no offence to DN ATC, just stating what I have come to expect!)

I don't know whether the height restriction was a contributig factor or not but it is not inconceivable that it could have played a part.

DN can be a humbling place at times with the hot weather, high gross weights (tankering in fuel because it's cheaper that way) 200' wide lumpy runway etc. It has the distinction (and probably still the dents in the runway) of my worst ever landing in the 767.

Glad to see the boys and girls doing the right thing and giving it away if they weren't stable!

I'm assuming it was a QF 'boeing Airliner'?

[ 23 November 2001: Message edited by: Keg ]

[bgt]

Keg . I agree last year I watched a QF 763 hot and high on finals at Bne mainly due to the fact he was asked to keep the speed up.
When he realised he was out of the slot he said to the tower '"this isn`t going to work" .Subsequently he went around.
"Stuffed that up" said an unknown voice.
Truth was, it was a well performed manouver an excellent decision ,and probably only caused a 5 min delay.
We can only hope the unknown voice was not put in the same position.
We can only hope the company stands behind these captains when they make the tough calls.
Good to see professional calls made from time to time !!!

[grange.guzzler]

Watch out boys and girls. Here comes Keg and he only has 2.66 miles per 1000' to get down. Then, heavens to murgatroid, he only has 200' width to put this great knarly monster on the ground. What a man!
*********
BCT the gentleman concerned has no need to explain a sound decision to carry out what is a perfectly (albeit infrequent)normal manouevre. If you weren't sitting in the left seat you have no idea of all the factors that lead to the decision. A pity the crazy bastard in QF 1 BKK didn't display the same airmanship.

[Three Bars]

QF policy is that there will be no "please explain" notices issued to Captains who decide to discontinue an approach and go-round.

[pterodactyl]

As bgt, Grange and Three Bars say there should never be any questioning of the decision to go around whatever the reason. Heaven forbid that anyone continues with an unsatisfactory approach for fear of recrimination afterwards. Nor should there be any adverse comment by colleagues in the crew room.

After all when a go around is decided nothing wrong has been done.....yet. On the other hand to continue with an approach which is unsatisfactory is wrong.

[Keg]

Sorry Grange that I'm can't be the hero that you appear to be or would like me to be. Alas, I'm just a humble QF F/O who can admit to burying the odd one for any variety or reasons. I can normally tell you what the contributing factors were too!!

I never said that it was hard, just that it can be humbling at times.

I guess that would come from my 'inexperience' being an ex cadet and all.

[SeaEagle]

I had thought that was the aircraft that lost its gear doors on approach. I assumed that they had gone around because of a "gear caution light".

[B'ar]

Darwin is notorious due to no updates for the FMC for quite a while and generally speaking a tailwind onto the ILS. The Fmc position which derives the descent profile can be 2 or 3 miles out which equates to around 1000 feet to high. One must watch the DME on arrival or else embarassment comes quickly. Keg ( FL195 to 52 DME DN ) I would assume that if the 767 is similar to the 737 52nm equates to around 17500ft on profile around 2000 feet high not 6000?
.............................................I use to fly one now I just make money $$$$$$$

[Bagot_Community_Locator]

No, it was NOT the QF 767 that lost its gear doors.

The pilot actually told ATC he is "hot and high"
but what did he tell his passengers ?

[grange.guzzler]

Keg. The expression HERO, is one to be used with extreme caution these days.

And by the way I don't believe I said anything about Cadet's. You seem a tad sensitive.

[Bargearse]

On a comfy 3x profile, planning to intercept the glideslope @ 3000' @ 10nm from 19500' @ 52nm seems to me to be a little steep and very close to the 6000' above profile that Keg mentioned.

[Keg]

Just had a quick look at the book and it shows an altitude of about 14000 feet (I had to extrapolate) at about 52 mile to go at the sort of weights that we normally go into DN at.

Grange, thought you were being schmarmy so 'bit'. Apologies and check your private messages.

[Balthazar]

I would probably tell the passengers that I didn't want to continue the landing.

If they complain, let marketing take it up.

The day I am scared to go around is the day I should and will give up flying.

Keg, don't worry, I screw up more landings than you do.