Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

No fault go around policy

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

No fault go around policy

Old 23rd Mar 2008, 21:28
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
All the operators for whom I've flown have required a report following a go-around (used to be called an overshoot).
I utterly disagree with this requirement.
A go-around is a normal procedure available to the aircraft commander.
What's so difficult about conducting a high energy manoeuvre?
You can do it from 5 feet and if you brush the runway, so what?
Go around - max thrust - flap 20 - pos clb - gear up.
Did I miss anything there? Haven't flown for a few years.
Basil is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2008, 23:26
  #22 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BA require an Air Safety Report. It is used for monitoring purposes and is never used as a tool for disciplining a pilot. BA may have many faults but its no blame and open safety culture is one to be envied.

I know that if I make a bad decision or end up operating outside company SOPs for whatever reason as long as I am honest, do not try to hide a transgression and have not been wilfully negligent then I may receive remedial training but will not be disciplined.
M.Mouse is online now  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 00:37
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London,England
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"The problem is that some in ppruneland see any report to the company as a chance to bring trouble on themselfs, if this is the case you have the wrong attitude to flying or more likely you are working in the wrong company."

Good post, and quite agree. We are asked to file a report on any G/A below 1000ft so that the company can keep track on these events and try to sort out airfields and approaches that produce high numbers of go-arounds, Nice 04L steep ILS was one I can think of in the past that was changed as a result of many operators reporting go-arounds due not stable, and I don't feel under any pressure not to go-around because of paperwork. All the company want is "g/a not stable" or "g/a runway blocked" etc. and you never hear about it again, whats the problem.
Max Angle is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 10:23
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting to see the differences here.

From an ATC point of view, I can only speak for Heathrow, but we report every go-around.

It doesn't get submitted into our Safety Tracking and Reporting system (ASR equivalent) unless the ATCO in question feels it deserves an MOR or a non-MOR observation, but routine GAs do still get entered by the Tower Supervisor into our GA database; time, callsigns, types (of the one ahead, and the one going around), runway state, day/night, reason, and any other information.

This is used mainly for statistical analysis and trend identification.

For example, a VIR A346 is far more likely to go around than other types, on a pro-rata basis.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 10:47
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airline # 1: Not required to report.
Airline # 2: Not required to report.
Airline # 3: Required to report if performed from below minima.
Airline # 4: Not required to report, but I do it anyway. That way it's in the system should any questions come up from pax, media, the web or God knows who else who might ask about it a year or so later.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 13:14
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"For example, a VIR A346 is far more likely to go around than other types, on a pro-rata basis."



Care to use some numbers? And why is that particular airline and aircraft being singled out by you? Fascinated to get some input from my VS colleagues!
Oilhead is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 16:12
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,787
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
Never required, and never should be in my opinion.
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2008, 17:50
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont see the problem. A GA always has a cause and if a report helps to elliminate these all well and good. I have never worked fo an Airline that attaches any blame to a GA.
rogerg is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2008, 03:04
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting development at my company. I have recently had to go-around due turbulence induced conditions. The follow up question: why was a (4000 hour) first officer handling in winds gusting upto 35 kts (down the runway). A colleague had a similar experience and was reminded that "we are a commercial operation - go arounds cost money!" and that "maybe it would be better had the skipper being the pilot handling"

Seems F/O s can't get any handling experience now if the windsock shows any sign of movement. I worry then that the first time these pilots get experience of gusty conditions is when they are in the left hand seat. As for me, I'll still just take those management bo###kings - pilots need to obtain those skills and it's better doing it with someone more experienced next to you than someone less experienced relying on you!

Thoughts??

or should I accept the commercial realities

sunny side up
Flyit Pointit Sortit is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2008, 00:42
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Late Great Planet Earth
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"A colleague had a similar experience and was reminded that "we are a commercial operation - go arounds cost money!"

Not half as much as a prang! Bird-brained, bean-counters!

As a former airline instructor, I used to teach my students, especially those doing their first command upgrade, is that the 4 most important words you can know as a captain are, "BRAKES SET," and "GO-AROUND!" Don't like what you see around you? Keep the Parking Brakes set until you're satisfied. Don't like what you see, or don't see, off the nose on approach? Go Around! It really is that simple, bird-brained bean-counters notwithstanding.
ACAV8R is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2008, 06:14
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It really is that simple, bird-brained bean-counters notwithstanding.
Which airlines "bean counters" or anyone else attaches blame to the crew for a GA?
rogerg is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 13:03
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry - was a bit tired and emotional when I posted the last and may have confused the issue - The company supported the Go-around and always will support Go-arounds when necessary.

The issue was that they criticised the captain for allowing the First Officer to handle in gusty conditions when the go-around occured.
Flyit Pointit Sortit is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 16:54
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In spite of all the doubters Ryanair also has no blame go-around policy. Obviously if you had done something questionable to require a go-around you had better get your story straight and sharpen up your English, but there you have it. So lets not go down this road ref our slip up in France please.
captplaystation is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 17:23
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Talking

Regretably, you are number 4 in the list of priorities after 1 - fly the aeroplane , 2 - communicate with ATC , 3 - communicate with the cabin crew.
However I , and any of my colleagues who consider themselves professional, will always try to give a quick ( hopefully reassuring )P.A. along the lines of , "don't worry we are not all about to die , Oh and by the way we are now diverting to Timbuhktu, where buses will be along in about . . .Oh 5 hours or so."
captplaystation is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 21:46
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
John R,
I was pax on a go-around a few weeks ago in a B777 at Newark.
From the cabin it was a smoothly flown non-event and I am sure most pax did not realise what had happened.
Re communication from the flight deck: In a busy terminal area, ensuring that: the aircraft is safely climbed and accellerated, correctly configured, the first and subsequent altitude restrictions are achieved, lateral navigation is accurate, ATC is informed and alterations to the standard go-around levels and routeing applied and checklists executed can generate quite a high workload.
That is before taking into account reason for go-around: weather, conflict, obstructed runway or the captain was not happy with his or his first officer's approach. Make another approach? Divert? How's the fuel?
A passenger would not expect a surgeon who has encountered more bleeding than expected during a procedure to pick up his mobile and tell the relatives about it. They would, quite rightly, expect the problem to be dealt with asap.

Yours was a valid question and please, please don't think I'm having a go. We do try to get a word in but on occasion there just isn't time.
In the days when the Chief could just walk into the flight deck we could turn around and, in amongst a lot of other chat, say, e.g: "Something on the runway, having another go, about 15 min to landing." and that would be passed on, in a less abrupt manner, to the passengers.

Perhaps the unlocked flight deck door, and suspender belts, will make a comeback. I won't hold my breath
Basil is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 22:33
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
John R, by the way, the Automatic Go-Around (at least on 737-800) which will be the one you could experience on a foggy day for instance, is quite aggresive ( i'm sure Boeing would prefer I describe it as positive) As the G/A may be commenced as low as 50 ft it has to be, but it could catch you unawares if sitting in the back and not expecting it.
captplaystation is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 23:08
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ryanair only require a report for a GA below 500 ft which is usually because Ops One has spotted a sweet wrapper on the runway.

Recently had to do a GA and descend which takes a bit of thinking when the a/c wants to go up. Fortunately flown by the FO who had quite a lot of Playstation time and was very impressive with the button pressing.
Grond is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2008, 23:17
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Recently had to do a GA and descend
can you expand on that? I'm guessing you commenced a GA early in the approach, but had a 'not above' restriction somewhere on the missed approach? did you fly it all manually?
Genuinly interested - not come across that scenario myself, and as they say, every day is a school day!
757_Driver is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2008, 01:54
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Excellent point by Grond.
Whereas a standard GA usually means immediate climb, there are occasions in which, in order to maintain separation from other traffic it will require descent then climb.
"Don't the automatics do it all for you guys?" Yea right!
Basil is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2008, 20:26
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

This is always a possibility at a place like Bergamo, where the G/A altitude is very low.
I always brief " in the event of G/A above that altitude, please try and tell ATC that we are going around altitude is----ft , what would you like ?". . . . . . expected response " Standby coordination in progress"
captplaystation is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.