TOGA frequency
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorks
Age: 64
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOGA frequency
Please feel free to move this into SLF if you think it's appropriate, but how often does this occur ?
In the years I hava been regular SLF (lots) and the millions of miles I've flown, it's happened to me thrice, last time this week into MEX when my KLM crew decided despite the main wheels being on the deck, it was in our interests to go around.
Other times have been EK into Manchester, and three attempts to get a GB airways flight into GIB, which was "a bit misty", hence we diverted to Malaga.
Just wondered how often this happens ?
In the years I hava been regular SLF (lots) and the millions of miles I've flown, it's happened to me thrice, last time this week into MEX when my KLM crew decided despite the main wheels being on the deck, it was in our interests to go around.
Other times have been EK into Manchester, and three attempts to get a GB airways flight into GIB, which was "a bit misty", hence we diverted to Malaga.
Just wondered how often this happens ?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My go-around rate is about once every 4-5 yrs.
Have to wonder about the go-around after touchdown that you experienced. That's more serious than an airborne go-around. Any reason given?
Have to wonder about the go-around after touchdown that you experienced. That's more serious than an airborne go-around. Any reason given?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Elysion
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real question is why is this thread in this forum? The poster seems to know fully well that this is not the right place, so why post here in the first place?
Is it that laziness just took over and 'bugger if I can be arsed to find the correct forum, I'll just post in the first one I find and let someone else sort it out' followed from there?
Is it that laziness just took over and 'bugger if I can be arsed to find the correct forum, I'll just post in the first one I find and let someone else sort it out' followed from there?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real question is why is this thread in this forum?
Is there a Roman History thread? That seems to be a more appropriate place for a discussion on togas.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to wonder about the go-around after touchdown that you experienced. That's more serious than an airborne go-around.
It was quite common many years ago, with straight-pipe powered jet transports.
By the time you had the engines spooled-up from 200agl (standard ILS minima) if you were at MLW, wheels touching the runway was nearly always guaranteed.
Now, if one was just a tad too quick with the gear lever under the above circumstances, the scenario then became more serious....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorks
Age: 64
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for posting in here, thought it might wrinkle a few proffessional noses but hey.........
Reason given was another aircraft on the runway, but alarming all the same, even for a PA28 jockey like myself.
Reason given was another aircraft on the runway, but alarming all the same, even for a PA28 jockey like myself.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: .
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well in that case despite "the main wheels being on the deck" then it was in your best interest to TOGA it!! Someone may have said they were ready for an immediate departure, not been for whatever reason, remained on the rwy and forced your flight to G/A. Not exactly a totally uncommon occurrence!! I am sure your crew took the decision to G/A well before the wheels touched down in that situation. There is a lot of inertia in airliners and it may have briefly touched down if the G/A was left as late as safely possible. Also it may have felt like it touched down but didn't. I saw a thread bashing Ryanair on here a while ago about a late G/A and how the aircraft "slammed" into the deck before climbing back up, I was sat at the hold watching it and it never touched down despite people on board being convinced that it had!
The only alarming thing about it is the possibility of being late after wasting 5 mins coming back round!
The only alarming thing about it is the possibility of being late after wasting 5 mins coming back round!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London, Berlin, Bucharest
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the decission to go around is made at the Decission Altitude. this at some airports can be as low as 250- 300 feet.
jets have a lot of inertia in them so when the pilots decide to go around it will take time for the aircraft to catch up with them. jet engines also take time to spool up when a power comand is given to them so this does not help a go around.
both of these together may have the aircraft drop down to the runway before the aircraft actualy starts going around, even though the decission would have been made a few seconds ago.
jets have a lot of inertia in them so when the pilots decide to go around it will take time for the aircraft to catch up with them. jet engines also take time to spool up when a power comand is given to them so this does not help a go around.
both of these together may have the aircraft drop down to the runway before the aircraft actualy starts going around, even though the decission would have been made a few seconds ago.
the decission to go around is made at the Decission Altitude. this at some airports can be as low as 250- 300 feet.
jets have a lot of inertia in them so when the pilots decide to go around it will take time for the aircraft to catch up with them. jet engines also take time to spool up when a power comand is given to them so this does not help a go around.
both of these together may have the aircraft drop down to the runway before the aircraft actualy starts going around, even though the decission would have been made a few seconds ago.
jets have a lot of inertia in them so when the pilots decide to go around it will take time for the aircraft to catch up with them. jet engines also take time to spool up when a power comand is given to them so this does not help a go around.
both of these together may have the aircraft drop down to the runway before the aircraft actualy starts going around, even though the decission would have been made a few seconds ago.
If you are flying an precision instrument approach then the decision to go-around or continue to land must be made by the Decision Altitude. That decison is dependent upon, amongst other things, you achieving and maintaining the required visual reference. If you have the reference at DH and you subsequently lose them then you go-around. You will have made that decision below decision altitude and it will be correct.
The height loss in a properly executed go-round is small, probably of the order of 50' for most airliners in the Medium category. There is very little "spool up" time on the engines as the majority aircraft have an Approach Idle setting or a minimum EPR specified as part of the Stable Approach Criteria.
If you go-around from an autoland at a very late stage, say 50', then you may contact the ground in the course of the manoeuvre. But if you do this in the simulator with the autopilot engaged you will see that it is possible to avoid contact even at this stage.
YS
In the nearly 40 years of flying all over the world as SLF - somewhere near 2000 flights, I've experienced just two go arounds. Ironically, on consecutive flights. The first one was in an Alitalia MD-80 over the threshold at Heathrow, when we flew into the wake of the preceding aircraft. There was a very significant wing drop and what seemed like an instantaneous application of power. It felt like a giant hand lifting us back into the sky. I can see why passengers can be scared by process.
The second one was much tamer by comparison. A very gentle power application in an Air Canada L1011 going into Calgary. The Captain announced the go around in advance due to a blocked runway. A departing light twin had a baggage locker open and deposited some bags on the runway!
Yellow Sun,can you elaborate on Decision Altitude? In Canada, where I do most of my (non-commercial) flying in light aircraft, there is a Minimum Descent Altitude for non-precision approaches and a Decision Height for precision approaches, but no definition of a Decision Altitude.
The second one was much tamer by comparison. A very gentle power application in an Air Canada L1011 going into Calgary. The Captain announced the go around in advance due to a blocked runway. A departing light twin had a baggage locker open and deposited some bags on the runway!
Yellow Sun,can you elaborate on Decision Altitude? In Canada, where I do most of my (non-commercial) flying in light aircraft, there is a Minimum Descent Altitude for non-precision approaches and a Decision Height for precision approaches, but no definition of a Decision Altitude.
Yellow Sun,can you elaborate on Decision Altitude? In Canada, where I do most of my (non-commercial) flying in light aircraft, there is a Minimum Descent Altitude for non-precision approaches and a Decision Height for precision approaches, but no definition of a Decision Altitude.
The above applies to non-precision and Category 1 precision approaches where the DA/H is defined by pressure altimetry. For Low vis ops, Cat 2/3, a more accurate datum is required and the radio altimeter is used to define the Height Above Touchdown (HAT) at which the decision is made. For Cat 2 the HAT will be not below 100' Rad Alt (RA) but if the ground in the DH area is lower than the TDZ then the DH(RA) will be higher. For CAT 3 in all its forms, the DH will be the actual height above touchdown as the much lower minima, 0-75' mean that you are over the runway at DH.
I hope that this answers your question. From what you say, I presume that you fly precision approaches on QFE.
YS
YS,
Thanks for the feedback. No, my Cat I ILS approaches were all done on "Altimeter Setting/ QNH". QFE is not used in Canada, and even if it were, you cannot wind the subscale far enough to get Zero feet at Calgary (3550'). I know, I tried once on the ground out of curiosity
It is interesting that there is no reference at all to Decision Altitude in the Canadian AIM and I have never heard the term used, but in practice of course, as you said, you have to add the DH to the TDZE and end up with a DA anyway.
I42
Thanks for the feedback. No, my Cat I ILS approaches were all done on "Altimeter Setting/ QNH". QFE is not used in Canada, and even if it were, you cannot wind the subscale far enough to get Zero feet at Calgary (3550'). I know, I tried once on the ground out of curiosity
It is interesting that there is no reference at all to Decision Altitude in the Canadian AIM and I have never heard the term used, but in practice of course, as you said, you have to add the DH to the TDZE and end up with a DA anyway.
I42
