G/A or a Baulked Approach?
 

What is the theoretical and practical difference between a G/A and a Baulked Approach, or is it actually called a Baulked Landing? Any ideas?
Cheers.

This is my interpretation:

All the way down to minimums, if you abort the approach it's called a G/A. Once you go past minimums, PF has called "Land" - hence committed to landing - and for some reason you abort the landing either due to ATC telling you to do so or blocked runway etc...then that's a baulked landing.

MB :8

Don't know if there's an official definition anywhere, but to me a baulked landing is basically a go-around anytime from the flare onwards.

Further to what Whoops said, our company SOPs have changed so that after the 'minimums' or 'decision' or whatever call your company has, the PF replies 'continue' rather than 'land'. I think this is a good move to prevent people getting into the mindset that they must land after passing the missed approach point when a go-around would be appropriate.

Don't know who you work for, could be the same as me as we have that SOP now. My thoughts are how long will it be before "continue" get's the PF into the mindset of landing, as that's what he does 99.9999% of the time once he has called "continue"!

Not heard that before, but as far as I am concerned I am doing a Go-Around at anytime until the thrust reversers have been deployed, whatever the reason!:ooh:

PP

Yes, as you imply it probably doesn't matter what the actual call is - the mindset is there already.

From a certification point of view, a go around is with approach flap and one engine inop, while a baulked landing is land flap and all engines. Different requirements for gradient apply to the two cases, with the numbers depending on the number of engines. So from a day to day point of view you could say that a go-around is from such a height that you immediately call for flaps to come up to approach and a baulked landing is when you wait to see if you're actually climbing before you touch anything....