Four whites on PAPI: Go around?

[sherburn2LA]

better to be in the air explaining why you did a go around than on the ground explaining why you did not

[Capot]

Caribou pilot demonstrating need for care with high approach angles...

[anotheruser]

If the GS is 120kts, at 1,000fpm you're not far off a 5deg GS - not what most would call stable, unless it's an approach into LCY. At 160kts, it's just over 3.5degs, on the edge of one red three whites territory.

I think that's the point. If you fly at 1000 fpm down to the runway, say for the last 1000 feet or so, at typical approach speeds that equals an approach angle much higher than the normal 3 degrees.

There are some runways in the world where the approach slope is higher than 3 degrees, and that is then called a "steep approach", is specially mentioned on the approach charts and requires special procedures (e.g. a different flap setting than a normal 3 degrees approach), briefings, and sometimes even special training for pilots.

Now just because you fly such kind of approach unplanned, does it make that so much easier that you can skip all those special procedures required for a steep approach?

[BOAC]

Originally Posted by Capot

Caribou pilot demonstrating need for care with high approach angles...

- yes, but at least he was in the t/d zone...................

[Lord Spandex Masher]

And by landing at the right speed he didn't use excessive runway or braking.

[West Coast]

PAPI at 3.55 degrees, 10 kt reported tailwind with 20 Kt windsock straight out telling you its far more than what's reported, landing at almost 8000 ft MSL in the mountains after coming off a NPA with descent rate approaching 2700 FPM down inside the FAF and a GS at 180 Kts, almost at tire limits onto a 8000 ft runway.

You see 4 whites, whaddya do?

Not some theoretical, rather a real airport with lots of challenges.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Auto brake to max?

[West Coast]

I am the auto brakes, hell, the AT as well.

[Microburst2002]

That is a very particular airport, and your company policy will set the rules.

2700 fpm? Sounds like too much, to me

[Doodlebug]

Close to 3000fpm ROD, 20kt tailwind, 3,5 degree slope, close to tire limits, 8000' rwy = circle-to-land or diversion, unless I was in a Twin Otter or similar with loads of time on type and a really pressing need to force it in, e.g. medical case.

[West Coast]

No circling, Aspen Colorado is already scary enough landing on ry 15 let alone scraping the hill on a circling g approach. Yes, 2500-2700 is quite common inside the FAF when flying the IAP.

[Doodlebug]

What type are you landing at Aspen with 20 knots pushing you?

[West Coast]

CRJ-700. 10Kts reported tailwinds but 20Kt windsocks completely erect.

[Doodlebug]

Whilst we do operate into strips other than your bog-standard 3-degrees-to-3-kilometres quite regularly, I suspect I might just divert on that particular day, but that's just me May it always work out for you.

[West Coast]

Not always! Enough however that our safety record is still intact

[Roger Greendeck]

This topic just shows why judgement is still so important in aviation. Whilst its always good in training to give students some pretty firm boundaries so they can develop their experience I am extremely frustrated with the push to put black and white law to every situation for people flying the line. The earlier post of 'it depends' says it all. There are so many variables even when flying the sane type into the same port every day that we must use our judgement to make thus type of decision.

If you flying a medium or heavy jet into a normal port (3 degree app and PAPI) it's not a normal view and you have to consider how you got here. ie ham fisted handling or were you left high by ATC and you have been working on fixing the problem, are in control and both pilots know what's going on. 'I saw four whites so I went around' is a pretty lame excuse but 'the approach was getting out of hand (even if not technically unstable) so I felt the a missed approach was the best course of action' should be fine with any reputable operator.

[galaxy flyer]

Funny thing about KASE, the RNP AR approach can have a very normal glide path--3 degrees--but a winding track. The airport is in a deep, rising valley with a "head wall" not far beyond. During the heat of the day, air rises up the valley, like a chimney creating tailwinds on final. Circling to 33 is a no-no in jets, at least at my operator. Pretty much one-way in, one-way out.

OTOH, the LOC-DME-C does have about 7 degree descent angle off of Red Table. Fanning the boards all the way in on a Global.

[West Coast]

We looked at RNP approaches there, but of all things, the mins were too low. Instead of a missed approach, it would have placed us within our emergency extraction point. You think your approachis hairy, look at the VOR DME approach, the VPA is something like 12.7 degrees. Not the slightest chance on that one.

[airflirt]

this is a real scenario for day to day flying. if you look at the stabilized approach criteria, it is clear that once you are visual on approach, you have to stabilize by 500' HAT. hence assuming that you broke clouds at roughly 1000', it is still okay to try and regain your profile provided your configurations allow that within the limits specified. thereafter depending on the assessment, GA might be initiated. however, do follow company SOP if it clearly mentions GA on four whites.
as for non availability of PAPI, it might make it simpler as you only need visual assessment of the point of touchdown. however, airplanes such as b737, a320 may not be regularly operated to runways with inop PAPI or VASI.