Go-around or land?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: MRats
Age: 54
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go-around or land?
An acft was cleared for and requested to call final approach. On final approach, pilot cannot get a landing clearance as the frequency is congested. Does he/she lands (assuming its safe to do) or does he/she initiates a go-around? The opion of others would be much appreciated.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: somewhere over the rainbow...
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interesting situation.
The way I understand it, the aircraft has already been cleared to land, and so the "final" call is just additional and does not affect the clearance.
However, the pilot ought to be keeping a look out on the runway and a listen out on the radio to check for any conflicting traffic that ATC may have to consider.
If you think its possible that the landing may become unsafe due to conflicting traffic, always go around.
My two cents
ETC
The way I understand it, the aircraft has already been cleared to land, and so the "final" call is just additional and does not affect the clearance.
However, the pilot ought to be keeping a look out on the runway and a listen out on the radio to check for any conflicting traffic that ATC may have to consider.
If you think its possible that the landing may become unsafe due to conflicting traffic, always go around.
My two cents
ETC
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Cleared for the approach does not equal cleared to land. There is only one option - GO AROUND - no brainer. Would you take off without clearance.......?
However the tower controller should not get engrossed in conversations with other aircraft to the extent that a landing clearance cannot be issued.
A4
However the tower controller should not get engrossed in conversations with other aircraft to the extent that a landing clearance cannot be issued.
A4
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: NE Surrey, UK
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question please, and it is on topic:
Why is it that US ATC gives the "clear to land" advice way out on the glidepath, whereas at LHR (and presumably at other UK airports) it comes much later - often when the aircraft is close to the threshold.
I would have though the UK timing of clearance gives much less time to repeat if interrupted, and also comes at a time when the flightcrew's workload is increasing for flare and touchdown.
Why is it that US ATC gives the "clear to land" advice way out on the glidepath, whereas at LHR (and presumably at other UK airports) it comes much later - often when the aircraft is close to the threshold.
I would have though the UK timing of clearance gives much less time to repeat if interrupted, and also comes at a time when the flightcrew's workload is increasing for flare and touchdown.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: N 43° 39' 54'' E 7° 12' 53''
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However the tower controller should not get engrossed in conversations with other aircraft to the extent that a landing clearance cannot be issued.
"XXXX TWR, good afternoon this is XXXXX, a robin DR 400-180HP vfr flight from XXXX to XXXX, 3 persons on board estimated endurance is 2 errrr sorry 3 hours, request to cross your zone, we're presently at..... shuffling noises and instructor's voice in the background...E point estimating EA point in about ....errr... 3 minutes, altitude is now one thousand four hundred feet on the QNH 1011 and we have information ...errr delta, over "
Would that fit in your "getting engrossed in conversations with other aircraft" category?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be a very general question to me....Are we talking LHR?Or JFK? Or LOS? For instance what if you suspected you had a radio failure? Or the tower frequency is blocked by an open mike ? Generally, I think Rainboe is right. You wouldn't land, however I can imagine situations where one would too.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was at work it would be a go around without question, though we would adjust the approach so that we could touch down at the latest possible point with sufficient runway remaining.
At my local GA airfield, though fully controlled, they prefer one to land behind if safe to do so to avoid the first aircraft then doing a touch and go into the path of the second.
At my local GA airfield, though fully controlled, they prefer one to land behind if safe to do so to avoid the first aircraft then doing a touch and go into the path of the second.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiya Folks,
I must say I'm a little shocked by some of the replies. This is a very simple scenario as I see it. Assuming you're in the UK, or indeed almost anywhere that doesn't believe they invented everything including life itself...
GO AROUND!!!!
You are NOT cleared to land, cleared for ILS approach or any other clearance is never a clearance to land. Even IF it were safe for you to do so, if I was a TWR controller I'd be half way out the tower and down the stairs before you even grind to a halt!!
You're a long time dead I assure you. Doesn't do the BP much good either!
Safely does it........
I must say I'm a little shocked by some of the replies. This is a very simple scenario as I see it. Assuming you're in the UK, or indeed almost anywhere that doesn't believe they invented everything including life itself...
GO AROUND!!!!
You are NOT cleared to land, cleared for ILS approach or any other clearance is never a clearance to land. Even IF it were safe for you to do so, if I was a TWR controller I'd be half way out the tower and down the stairs before you even grind to a halt!!
You're a long time dead I assure you. Doesn't do the BP much good either!
Safely does it........
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wild Blue Yonder
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Landing Clearance
Seloco,
I think that the answer to your question is that US controllers give What they call a "conditional" clearance. This works on the principle that it is conditional on any other events having been completed (ie a take-off or a landing) by the time the aircraft on finals is in a position to actually do the landing. I had this kind of clearance on a regular basis while working in the USA. Back here I believe that an an ATC controller only gives a clearance when everything is in place for the clearance to be given (ie runway clear). At a busy airfield, therefore, it is not too surprising that some clearances are issued quite late.
Hope that helps.
M1.1
I think that the answer to your question is that US controllers give What they call a "conditional" clearance. This works on the principle that it is conditional on any other events having been completed (ie a take-off or a landing) by the time the aircraft on finals is in a position to actually do the landing. I had this kind of clearance on a regular basis while working in the USA. Back here I believe that an an ATC controller only gives a clearance when everything is in place for the clearance to be given (ie runway clear). At a busy airfield, therefore, it is not too surprising that some clearances are issued quite late.
Hope that helps.
M1.1
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As can be seen on that other thread, there are many people who live in an ideal black and white world where there is only one answer to every question. Unfortunately my world has a few grey areas (and I'm not talking about my hair).
A few years ago I was operating a 747 into Heathrow. The F/O was doing his very first landing on type (ZFT). After holding at BNN around some very interesting Cb's we were cleared for an approach onto 09L. During the latter stages of the approach the Air France A320 ahead was taking his time trunding down the runway. The controller told us to expect a late landing clearance. At about 300ft the A320 was clear but then the aircraft behing, rather than just calling "4 miles" decided to give his life story over the RT. With a trainee in the RHS and some fascinating weather on the go-aroung track, I decided to land anyway as the runway was clear and I had been told to expect a late clearance. The very nice lady controller gave the landing clearance at about 10ft (that's my story and I'm sticking to it!)
I realise that I was probably wrong (unless it could be classed as a radio failure) but now and again in aviation you have to do what you thingk is safe, despite what the rulebook says. However, a black and white world is probably much easier than my grey one.
Airclues
A few years ago I was operating a 747 into Heathrow. The F/O was doing his very first landing on type (ZFT). After holding at BNN around some very interesting Cb's we were cleared for an approach onto 09L. During the latter stages of the approach the Air France A320 ahead was taking his time trunding down the runway. The controller told us to expect a late landing clearance. At about 300ft the A320 was clear but then the aircraft behing, rather than just calling "4 miles" decided to give his life story over the RT. With a trainee in the RHS and some fascinating weather on the go-aroung track, I decided to land anyway as the runway was clear and I had been told to expect a late clearance. The very nice lady controller gave the landing clearance at about 10ft (that's my story and I'm sticking to it!)
I realise that I was probably wrong (unless it could be classed as a radio failure) but now and again in aviation you have to do what you thingk is safe, despite what the rulebook says. However, a black and white world is probably much easier than my grey one.
Airclues
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mahlangeni
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I see it...
Use your nous and airmanship. Now THAT sounds broadband-like.
Ok, what do I mean...?
If the frequency is blocked, the runway is clear and you cannot get that call in or be called, LAND. Why? Because you can treat the situation like a lost COMMS situation. Land at nearest suitable aerodrome. Seeing that you are already looking at that "nearest suitable" aerodrome right in front of you, LAND.
But as always there are other variables that come into play. These must be considered within a short space of time. (WX, fuel, traffic behind you or waiting in the holding pattern and the 101 other things to consider).
The other option is to step on the frequency and just say: "WE ARE LANDING!"
Use your nous and airmanship. Now THAT sounds broadband-like.
Ok, what do I mean...?
If the frequency is blocked, the runway is clear and you cannot get that call in or be called, LAND. Why? Because you can treat the situation like a lost COMMS situation. Land at nearest suitable aerodrome. Seeing that you are already looking at that "nearest suitable" aerodrome right in front of you, LAND.
But as always there are other variables that come into play. These must be considered within a short space of time. (WX, fuel, traffic behind you or waiting in the holding pattern and the 101 other things to consider).
The other option is to step on the frequency and just say: "WE ARE LANDING!"
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up north
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Landed once at AGP after repeated attempts to get clearance.
At the time it was CAVOK there were no aircraft on at the hold and all was quiet on the TWR freq.
Cleared the runway, called ground who cleared us to stand without a mumur just a short admission that they had had a temporary problem with the TWR freq.
Glad I didn't go around as it happens!
Tin hat on ready for incoming.
At the time it was CAVOK there were no aircraft on at the hold and all was quiet on the TWR freq.
Cleared the runway, called ground who cleared us to stand without a mumur just a short admission that they had had a temporary problem with the TWR freq.
Glad I didn't go around as it happens!
Tin hat on ready for incoming.
Have to agree with the last three posts. Life as a Captain involves taking the safest course of action. That does not always mean playing by the rules. Captain Airclues analogy about grey areas is spot on. Monday morning quarterbacks tend to talk about things in black & white.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly OT but..
This problem with blocked frequencies has caused accidents in the past. It's a problem that's solvable with the right technology. Are there any plans to do anything about it?
This problem with blocked frequencies has caused accidents in the past. It's a problem that's solvable with the right technology. Are there any plans to do anything about it?