Balked landing: Regulations

[Lan_Morehell]

Hi all!

I'm trying to get together small pieces of info regarding the balked landing. It is needed for a qualification work. I am really stuck and need your help to move forward....

Disposition:
1. We have a strict and well regulated requirements for missed approach procedures started at MAPt:
- Segments are well defined (8168 v1 and 2)
- Obstacle clearance is known (8168 v2)
- the procedure width, segment length, bank angles and so on (8168)
- required climb gradient is also defined (in 8168- for procedure and in EU-OPS for AC performance)

So, for the G/A at MAPT our flight path and actions are well defined

But. now lets consider we are performing the balked landing (Runway incursion right at the moment of touchdown). And in worst case, engine fails at the moment we press TO/GA switch.
What do we know?
- not a single word about it is said in 8168
- EU-OPS1 defines the landing climb gradient with all engines and approach climb with EO (OK, maybe we can reconfigure to approach quickly...).
- Annex 14 defines the balked landing obstacle-free surface. but only for precision approaches. And it has 4% gradient!!!

So, there are lots of open questions:
- How to determine whether we need a special procedure, or we can fly a standard missed approach procedure? (innsbruck has a special whereas lot of other charts don't say anything about it)
- What MOC is required for such case?
- What climb gradient should we have and how to stick together the EU-ops climb requirements and Annex 14 Obstacle-free zone gradient?
- Somewhere here I saw that it's better to fly EOSID in such case. BUT, how can we decide to switch from missed approach track to EOSID track? on what criteria, what regulations?

Please help me to stick all this together to get a clear vision regarding the regulations and procedures for balked landing.

[FE Hoppy]

This is an airmanship question rather than a regulatory one. Your scenario is outside of regulatory requirements due to the vey low possibility of it happening.

There are an infinite number of other scenarios which are also not covered in the regulations.

The best way to look at this is to find the closest regulated case and use that as your starting point.

Engine failure after V1 is probably the closest thing in this case unless there is a CAT3 missed approach procedure.

[Lan_Morehell]

Thank you! This is logical, but from practical point of view: How can I decide, for example, during the approach briefing, the correct course of action? In many airports, balked landing follows the same path as missed approach. How can I evaluate whether it is safe or not? Or should I switch to EO SID?

And from another point of view, The Operator establishes balked landing procedures for several airports. On what provisions? What methods do they use, what factors are taken into consideration? I cannot believe that it's a "finger pointed towards the sky".

[*Lancer*]

Many companies specify that the EOSID (or equivalent) should be flown for a discontinued approach below the MDA, as this will provide obstacle clearance.

[Kirks gusset]

Balked Landing Procedure after LOC or NDB APCH GAZIPASA RW 08

At 500ft climb 078° - at RW08 (D0.6 GZP) RT 230° (20° bank). Do not accelerate until 2500ft - continue climb to published MSA.

We have published Balked Landing Procedures for certain airports, as observed, they cover the MSA issues