Missed Approaches
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sussex UK
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missed Approaches
QR125 this morning did a go around on attempting to land at Doha. Bumpy approach, high winds and blowing dust. Quite a late decision to go around, I believe. I'm not questioning the need for a second attempt or the crew's competence. My question is more general - how frequent are 'missed approaches' in these days of highly automated landings and fly-by-wire aircraft? One in a hundred? Or whatever ....??
I've done a good deal of flying over the years (as SLF) and I can recall one aborted take off in a GF Tristar half way down the runway at Bahrain and one interesting take off from Tehran and landing at Dubai in EK AB 3XX with no nose-wheel steering. But this was a first missed approach for me. And with luck it'll be the last.
I've done a good deal of flying over the years (as SLF) and I can recall one aborted take off in a GF Tristar half way down the runway at Bahrain and one interesting take off from Tehran and landing at Dubai in EK AB 3XX with no nose-wheel steering. But this was a first missed approach for me. And with luck it'll be the last.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might go years without doing one on the line (you will always practice them at the six month simulator checks,) or you might do two in the same week.
It is a standard flight profile if there is any reason for not completing the landing.
Those reasons are many and varied:
The runway may be blocked by another aircraft. That may be because it is late commencing the take off roll. It may have abandoned its takeoff. It may be late vacating the runway after its own landing. It may have a radio failure or other technical fault. It may also be that the runway is obstructed or threatened by a ground vehicle.
For the above and other tactical reasons ATC may instruct the approaching aircraft to "Go around."
An aircraft must be stabilised on the approach usually by 1000ft, but certainly by 500ft at the latest. If it isn't then it should ordinarily "Go around."
The aircraft can be unstabilized by a myriad of factors that include such things as poor weather, late tactical changes, rushed approaches. If an aircraft isn't stabilised within laid down parameters, then standard operating procedures and good airmanship, will usually require a missed approach (go around) to be carried out.
The crew can also carry out a missed approach at any time (and not withstanding the above,) they deem it necessary or prudent.
Missed approaches are not uncommon in themselves, such that at any major airport they will almost be a daily occurence to some degree, however for the individual pilot or indeed passenger they are not a particularly frequent occurence, although as I say you may get lucky/unlucky and have two the same week.
I should also point that out, that "fly by wire" has little relevance to the incidence rate, for the reasons already given. Likewise, automatic approaches, (which are rarely conducted outside of conditions requiring their use,) also have little bearing on the frequency of the event.
It is a standard flight profile if there is any reason for not completing the landing.
Those reasons are many and varied:
The runway may be blocked by another aircraft. That may be because it is late commencing the take off roll. It may have abandoned its takeoff. It may be late vacating the runway after its own landing. It may have a radio failure or other technical fault. It may also be that the runway is obstructed or threatened by a ground vehicle.
For the above and other tactical reasons ATC may instruct the approaching aircraft to "Go around."
An aircraft must be stabilised on the approach usually by 1000ft, but certainly by 500ft at the latest. If it isn't then it should ordinarily "Go around."
The aircraft can be unstabilized by a myriad of factors that include such things as poor weather, late tactical changes, rushed approaches. If an aircraft isn't stabilised within laid down parameters, then standard operating procedures and good airmanship, will usually require a missed approach (go around) to be carried out.
The crew can also carry out a missed approach at any time (and not withstanding the above,) they deem it necessary or prudent.
Missed approaches are not uncommon in themselves, such that at any major airport they will almost be a daily occurence to some degree, however for the individual pilot or indeed passenger they are not a particularly frequent occurence, although as I say you may get lucky/unlucky and have two the same week.
I should also point that out, that "fly by wire" has little relevance to the incidence rate, for the reasons already given. Likewise, automatic approaches, (which are rarely conducted outside of conditions requiring their use,) also have little bearing on the frequency of the event.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go arounds are the safest action when an aircraft is not maintaining parameters specified by the airline company and or civil aviation regulations.
All landings are manual except during fog when visibility is a factor.(crew/aircraft/airport certified).
Of course himan error rather than weather or aircraft system failure may trigger a go around,in which case a go around is also the safest and soundest action.
Be glad they did so as it could have ended quite bad if they elected to do otherwise.
Personnaly,i happen to be in a go around on a average once a year.
Last time was a sink rate triggered by f/o which caused a go around at 39feet...
All landings are manual except during fog when visibility is a factor.(crew/aircraft/airport certified).
Of course himan error rather than weather or aircraft system failure may trigger a go around,in which case a go around is also the safest and soundest action.
Be glad they did so as it could have ended quite bad if they elected to do otherwise.
Personnaly,i happen to be in a go around on a average once a year.
Last time was a sink rate triggered by f/o which caused a go around at 39feet...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sussex UK
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys - informative stuff. I stand corrected on 'automation' having any impact on frequency of missed approaches.
This one today was almost certainly weather-related. Can't say when the decision was made but I'm pretty sure we were over the airport perimeter fence before the crew initiated thrust and whatever else is needed to go around.
And I've remembered one previously. EK into Dubai - it seems a trainee pilot did not lower the wheels. But that was detected some way out on the approach and was less unsettling than today's roller coaster ride.
This one today was almost certainly weather-related. Can't say when the decision was made but I'm pretty sure we were over the airport perimeter fence before the crew initiated thrust and whatever else is needed to go around.
And I've remembered one previously. EK into Dubai - it seems a trainee pilot did not lower the wheels. But that was detected some way out on the approach and was less unsettling than today's roller coaster ride.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been flying airliners for about one year and a half, over 1000 hours (on type) and probably in the region of 600 sectors. To give an idea of the frequency, in that time I've had four go arounds. Some people go years without experiencing one, but a lot depends on the airports you're operating to and from.
The first was when we were taking radar vectors to an approach: the controller turned us in too early, gave us too short a ground track, meaning we were too high on the profile. Despite doing everything we could to lose height we were unable to get back on the descent profile and went around at about 800ft AGL, before we reached the gate.
Next time, the preceeding aircraft didn't vacate the runway in time. We reach Decision Altitude (=200ft agl) before getting cleared to land, so no choice but to go around.
Third one was a good'un. On a Cat3 autoland in crap weather at night. Came out of cloud at about 60ft with the aircraft not aligned with centreline to our satisfaction. Decision height was 50ft agl and we initiated a go-around at minima. If you think that the aircraft is descending at 750fpm approx, the engines take a finite time to spool up and the aircraft has a lot of inertia, then the aircraft probably bottomed out at 15ft or so. I believe it's not unheard of for wheels to touch the tarmac on such Cat3 GAs.
Last one was an approach to an airport in the Alps with fairly high weather requirements due to the surrounding terrain. After starting the approach the mist thickened slightly, ATC reported a Runway Visual Range just below the minimum we required and therefore we had no choice but to go around.
Most passengers will never experience a go around, most of the rest may see it once. Due to their infequency very few members of the public will have seen it more than once. Because it is unusual and unexpected some will equate this to some sort of emergency but it is nothing of the sort. It is a standard manoeuvre, practiced ad nauseaum and often the result of utterly mundane causes. It is a high workload time for the crew and may surprise the passenger but that's about it.
The first was when we were taking radar vectors to an approach: the controller turned us in too early, gave us too short a ground track, meaning we were too high on the profile. Despite doing everything we could to lose height we were unable to get back on the descent profile and went around at about 800ft AGL, before we reached the gate.
Next time, the preceeding aircraft didn't vacate the runway in time. We reach Decision Altitude (=200ft agl) before getting cleared to land, so no choice but to go around.
Third one was a good'un. On a Cat3 autoland in crap weather at night. Came out of cloud at about 60ft with the aircraft not aligned with centreline to our satisfaction. Decision height was 50ft agl and we initiated a go-around at minima. If you think that the aircraft is descending at 750fpm approx, the engines take a finite time to spool up and the aircraft has a lot of inertia, then the aircraft probably bottomed out at 15ft or so. I believe it's not unheard of for wheels to touch the tarmac on such Cat3 GAs.
Last one was an approach to an airport in the Alps with fairly high weather requirements due to the surrounding terrain. After starting the approach the mist thickened slightly, ATC reported a Runway Visual Range just below the minimum we required and therefore we had no choice but to go around.
Most passengers will never experience a go around, most of the rest may see it once. Due to their infequency very few members of the public will have seen it more than once. Because it is unusual and unexpected some will equate this to some sort of emergency but it is nothing of the sort. It is a standard manoeuvre, practiced ad nauseaum and often the result of utterly mundane causes. It is a high workload time for the crew and may surprise the passenger but that's about it.
Last edited by Torque Tonight; 14th Mar 2011 at 20:40.
Paxing All Over The World
Dubaian. This link is in the forum FAQ.
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...o-arounds.html
I've been paxing for 45 years and never experienced one, so perhaps 11 days from now will change that!
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...o-arounds.html
I've been paxing for 45 years and never experienced one, so perhaps 11 days from now will change that!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NZ
Age: 55
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could be right, PAXboy. Until last year, I'd only experienced one go-around. But then last year, I had 5 go-arounds in one day. My local airport is prone to fog, the pilot had 3 goes at landing and took us back to Auckland. We then tried again a couple of hours later, had 2 further attempts and then diverted. For me, the interesting part was that as we flew back round, there was a gap in the cloud which meant that the view of the airport from above was completely clear. However, the horizontal view on approach was completely obscured by the surrounding cloud.
This was in a 19-seater with an open cockpit door, so I could see pretty much what the pilots could see (i.e. lots of fog and not much else). I was very happy that they didn't land. Being able to see what the pilots were doing definitely made the experience less unsettling than it would otherwise have been.
This was in a 19-seater with an open cockpit door, so I could see pretty much what the pilots could see (i.e. lots of fog and not much else). I was very happy that they didn't land. Being able to see what the pilots were doing definitely made the experience less unsettling than it would otherwise have been.
Paxing All Over The World
Yes, Pohutu, I know what you mean BUT ... I recall being in a 6 pax twin flying through the edge of storm in South Africa (1985) and then landing in torrential rain. Watching the pilot doing a fabulous job was instructive but, you could see how really bad it was out there! 
Many years later, I was in the jump seat of a 733 landing in heavy rain and cross wind (1999) and seeing at first hand that the captain really was working hard on his manual landing made me realise - how really bad it was out there!
Many years later, I was in the jump seat of a 733 landing in heavy rain and cross wind (1999) and seeing at first hand that the captain really was working hard on his manual landing made me realise - how really bad it was out there!
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the last 10 years of longhaul flying I've averaged about one go around about every 18 months which equates to probably one every 150 sectors. The most common cause is an occupied runway, the last one was about 18 months ago when the flight ahead of us reported shedding a panel on the runway.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Decision height
Some years ago, we were coming in to land at Darwin on a Qantas 767. We overflew the airport on approach and I could see that there were some very dark clouds nearby with lots of rain visible underneath. As we crossed the boundary fence, the squall line was clearly visible ahead of us. We touched down in bright sunshine on a bone-dry runway and halfway through our landing roll the sky went dark and the heavens opened, with the type of heavy rain you rarely see outside the tropics. I'm sure the flight crew were keeping a close eye on the changing weather and, had the front sped up, I might well have had another go-around to add to my collection.
