Go-around - my first sighting

AES wrote
Hard to judge from a passenger seat, but it seemed to take
forever to get the engines spooled back up to full power, and
for the plane to stop descending and start actually climbing.

Yep! If it's not IMC at minimums, we tried to give the PAX as
smooth a ride as possible.

Suppose a commercial airliner is in the late stages of an
approach, and an sudden hard go-around decision is made.
Assuming everything is done right, how much additional altitude
is lost before the airplane levels off and starts climbing?

Under those conditions, very little...perhaps 50' at most.

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

Capt Doug,

I never in my 17,000 hours with a very profitable Part 121 carrier, had
to explain why I executed a go-around. And yes I did my share of
go-arounds.

You see time off for not executing an ATC direct go-around is just not
worth the "efficiency consideration".

Time off for landing with an unsafe landing configuration is just not
worth the "efficiency consideration".

Time off for landing at an airport in which conditions are out of
limits is just not worth the "efficiency consideration".

"The smart captain spaces himself..."


I bet ATC just loves having you in their traffic pattern.

Back when the air carriers first got TCAS, I recall a infamous S.E. US
part 121 carrier going around over the threshold at Hobby 13R because
he got a TCAS WARNING. He explained that it was his company policy to
go-around anytime TCAS alerted. Of course it was clear and a million,
no vehicles or aircraft on the runway. Hobby Tower nor the other pilot
on frequency were NOT impressed with that decision. The TCAS Warning
orginated from a transponder being benched tested in a hangar.

One visual peeky-boo and common sense is worth $$$$.

I recall a infamous S.E. US
part 121 carrier going around over the threshold at Hobby 13R because
he got a TCAS WARNING. He explained that it was his company policy to
go-around anytime TCAS alerted. [...]

One visual peeky-boo and common sense is worth $$$$.

I don't worry about the traffic I see, just the traffic I don't. One
visual peeky-boo won't guarantee that I see the traffic.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

lynn wrote:

Back when the air carriers first got TCAS, I recall a infamous S.E. US
part 121 carrier going around over the threshold at Hobby 13R because
he got a TCAS WARNING. He explained that it was his company policy to
go-around anytime TCAS alerted. Of course it was clear and a million,
no vehicles or aircraft on the runway. Hobby Tower nor the other pilot
on frequency were NOT impressed with that decision. The TCAS Warning
orginated from a transponder being benched tested in a hangar.

I would have gone around too. The problem is not with the pilot
but the procedure. I bet after the many thousand dollar mistake
the airline changed its procedure. In general, procedures are
there for a reason. I fly light a/c. You're probably flying
heavies for a part 121. I'm sure you have one, two or maybe
even three procedures to worry about. I bet I'm preaching
to the choir. ;-) ;-)

Gerald

At 50 feet over the threshold, the runway is clear, and "Cleared to
land" by tower and NO traffic, I would land.

I was the next aircraft to land behind the go-around. I saw the false
TCAS signal to the right of 13R at Hobby approximately where the
hangars were located. Again one peeky-boo confirmed no aircraft
traffic.

Jim Macklin,

It was a three-holer on a revenue flight. This legacy carrier did/does
not fly 1000 miles to Hobby to train crewmembers.

I asked Hobby Tower about the go-around and they said it was a TCAS
alert. I asked about the traffic and Hobby said there was NO TRAFFIC.

Lynn,
ATP, B.S., M. A., PQRSTUX...w..x..y..z

"lynn" wrote in message Capt Doug,
I never in my 17,000 hours with a very profitable Part 121 carrier, had
to explain why I executed a go-around. And yes I did my share of
go-arounds.
You see time off for not executing an ATC direct go-around is just not
worth the "efficiency consideration".
Time off for landing with an unsafe landing configuration is just not
worth the "efficiency consideration".
Time off for landing at an airport in which conditions are out of
limits is just not worth the "efficiency consideration".
"The smart captain spaces himself..."
I bet ATC just loves having you in their traffic pattern.

Your writing is hard to follow. Are you being condescending or encouraging?

D.

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
but surely not real-time in an aircraft, Doug? The twice-yearly routine
is in a simulator, I'm sure! And that's what simulators are there for
anyway, isn't it - to hone your aviation knowledge and skills in upset
and abnormal situations?

Yup, in real time. Once in a while, we have to do a real go-around. I
watched my co-pilot do one for real yesterday. ATC hung us up at FL220 until
about 40 DME from the airport. After finally getting a descent clearance, we
dove for the runway but it was just too tight. A 360 turn wasn't allowed
because of traffic behind us.

D.

"AES" wrote in message
Suppose a commercial airliner is in the late stages of an approach, and
an sudden hard go-around decision is made. Assuming everything is done
right, how much additional altitude is lost before the airplane levels
off and starts climbing?

Every situation is different. A max effort in the a heavy MD-80 took only
about 40'. Usually, we don't need max effort and focus on passenger comfort.
I've talked to pilots who fly heavies in Alaska who say that it's not
unusual for the wheels to briefly touch the runway during a Cat 2 or 3a ILS
missed approach.

D.

Don't know why my name is in this, I didn't write ANY of
what is on this page.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"lynn" wrote in message
oups.com...
| At 50 feet over the threshold, the runway is clear, and
"Cleared to
| land" by tower and NO traffic, I would land.
|
| I was the next aircraft to land behind the go-around. I
saw the false
| TCAS signal to the right of 13R at Hobby approximately
where the
| hangars were located. Again one peeky-boo confirmed no
aircraft
| traffic.
|
| Jim Macklin,
|
| It was a three-holer on a revenue flight. This legacy
carrier did/does
| not fly 1000 miles to Hobby to train crewmembers.
|
| I asked Hobby Tower about the go-around and they said it
was a TCAS
| alert. I asked about the traffic and Hobby said there was
NO TRAFFIC.
|
| Lynn,
| ATP, B.S., M. A., PQRSTUX...w..x..y..z
|