Go around or not?

[Ytheroxxx]

Hi guys,please help me to clarify this issue.
On short final,what if the PAPI become u/s at 300ft,but we still in visual condition,shall we continue the approach or go around?
People always telling me that during typical ILS approach,we shouldn't follow the GS and PAPI anymore once we reached the minimum,since we should fly visual afterwards.Is this correct or not?
For myself,I will choose to continue approach with PAPI u/s.

[flyhardmo]

If you can't land an aircraft without the guidance of a PAPI, you shouldn't be in the control seat of an aircraft.

[Check Airman]

I'd be interested to hear the argument for going around. The OP said he'd land. What did the other person have to say?

[Coastrider26]

The papi does not have the same calibration requirement as the ILS glideslope. The airport is "free" to place it after let's say 100 ft down from the actual TDZ. Where as the ILS has to be calibrated using the touchdown zone.

Secondly the minimum eye height over threshold might not be applicable to your type of aircraft.

So I would say yes you can continue without papi, not following the ILS anymore below sounds like something learned in flying school, how do we fly CAT II/III if the gs is not reliable below 300ft?

[fpuentegomez]

As far as I know, the PAPI is an aid for the approach, not a requirement, hence there is no need for it.

I have landed in tons of runways without a PAPI.

[Ytheroxxx]

Originally Posted by Coastrider26

The papi does not have the same calibration requirement as the ILS glideslope. The airport is "free" to place it after let's say 100 ft down from the actual TDZ. Where as the ILS has to be calibrated using the touchdown zone.

Secondly the minimum eye height over threshold might not be applicable to your type of aircraft.

So I would say yes you can continue without papi, not following the ILS anymore below sounds like something learned in flying school, how do we fly CAT II/III if the gs is not reliable below 300ft?

Thank you for your explanation,I fly A320 families,it happened to me many times that I have to keep 3 reds and 1 white to maintain profile at PVG Shanghai.

[vilas]

Once you are stable and visual there is no requirement of any electronic OR VASI/PAPI guidance. From minima a steady ROD/FPA should be flown.If GS is there use it for guidance.

[Johnny F@rt Pants]

Originally Posted by Ytheroxxx

Thank you for your explanation,I fly A320 families,it happened to me many times that I have to keep 3 reds and 1 white to maintain profile at PVG Shanghai.

You might find the PAPI's are set for "larger" aeroplanes that have a higher flight deck, therefore in smaller aeroplanes the PAPI's appear incorrect.

Going back to your original question - land

[cessnapete]

To add to previous comments. If you can't fly a manual, stable, visual approach from any point on your flight, you shouldn't be in the front seat of an airliner!
Disturbingly,it appears from many recent incidents /accidents that many pilots find it difficult, and in some cases beyond their capability.

[Capt Fathom]

On short final,what if the PAPI become u/s at 300ft,but we still in visual condition,shall we continue the approach or go around?

So you go around. Then what? The PAPI is u/s. You can't land!

[galaxy flyer]

Originally Posted by Capt Fathom

So you go around. Then what? The PAPI is u/s. You can't land!

Reminds me of the solemn NBC (US) reporter, when the US PATCO controllers went on strike, "controllers remained on duty to land the last inbound airliner". Like it could be left up there!

GF

[PENKO]

In our vast network I know of only one airfield where PAPI's were mandatory. They changed that rule last year.

In my company PAPI's are only mandatory during night circling and I guess most airlines are similar. So why on earth would you go around on a normal approach?