Question of aborted landing after instrument approach

In article om,
wrote:

Ah, that makes sense!

However, let's say it was a snowplow or a deer, or a mechanical problem
with the landing gear (that's far fetched since the gear goes down
sooner -- or at least it does when I'm flying )

A snowplow on the runway at HAF?! You'd have a lot more problems than
just flying the missed :-).

Hamish

Fly the published missed approach procedure, that is what it is for.


Visit our website for more aviation data, to talk with an expert, view
jobs, post your pilot resume and profile, and read aviation news.


http://PilotWeb.org

Your posts here do not inspire confidence in pilotweb.org.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

That is a very good observation. I would be interested to know how many
airports there are where the difference between a missed and a
departure procedure are significantly different to warrant
consideration.


wrote:
Ray,

Thanks for finding the pertinent section of the AIM for us. I'm glad I
asked!

I don't have too many actual hours under my belt, but I've never
self-briefed a DP before an approach. Next time, I will -- at a minimum
to find out if there are any interesting objects I need to be aware of
in the departure path.

-- dave j

Ray wrote:
After looking at the AIM I found that I was wrong and the original
poster was correct - the AIM recommends flying the departure procedu

AIM 5-4-21(g)
"Missed approach obstacle clearance is predicated on beginning the
missed approach procedure at the MAP from MDA or DA and then climbing
200 feet/NM or greater. Initiating a go-around after passing the
published MAP may result in total loss of obstacle clearance. To
compensate for the possibility of reduced obstacle clearance during a
go-around, a pilot should apply procedures used in takeoff planning.
Pilots should refer to airport obstacle and departure data prior to
initiating an instrument approach procedure."

Learn something new every day...

- Ray

wrote:
ow this might have played out
if I had been on an instrument approach. Say I was on an ILS (HAF has
none, but pretend) at minimums, and I had to abort the landing after
the MAP. The weather is way below circling, so I need to get back up
again. It's too late to fly the missed. What can I safely do?

On the garden variety Cat 1 ILS you are at 200 feet AGL and over the
approach lights when you reach DH (decision height). How would it be
"too late" to fly the missed approach? If you are genuinely concerned,
pitch for VX instead of VY for any percieved obstacle clearance, but VY
should suffice nicely.

Also think about the practical aspects.. You went around because of a
runway incursion by an aircraft that didn't look before entering the
runway... had this been during a socked in IFR day, with a 200 or 300
foot ceiling, the vfr guys wouldnt even be turning a wheel. If you were
on approach, you would own the airspace and the approach until
confirming you were on the ground with ATC or cancelling IFR. Likewise,
departures would be limited to folks who are operating under an IFR
departure clearance (via live radio or void time clearance).. You may
still have a runway incursion while on an IFR approach to minimums, but
its less likely to be another plane, and more likely to be an animal,
vehicle or an idiot who shouldnt be operating his plane where s/he is.

Dave

wrote:
ow this might have played out
if I had been on an instrument approach. Say I was on an ILS (HAF has
none, but pretend) at minimums, and I had to abort the landing after
the MAP. The weather is way below circling, so I need to get back up
again. It's too late to fly the missed. What can I safely do?

Dave S wrote:
On the garden variety Cat 1 ILS you are at 200 feet AGL and over the
approach lights when you reach DH (decision height). How would it be
"too late" to fly the missed approach? If you are genuinely concerned,
pitch for VX instead of VY for any percieved obstacle clearance, but VY
should suffice nicely.

I mis-wrote in my first post, though most readers got my drift. I said
I was at minimums when I should have said that the weather was at
minimums (implying, for example, that circling back would be out) I was
talking about a scenario where I would be well below DH or past a MAP
when the runway incursion occurs.

As you point out, every instrument pilot knows you can initiate a
missed approach from DH or at the MAP. After all, most of us learned
how to fly approaches by repeatedly practicing that very scenario.

Also think about the practical aspects.. You went around because of a
runway incursion by an aircraft that didn't look before entering the
runway... had this been during a socked in IFR day, with a 200 or 300
foot ceiling, the vfr guys wouldnt even be turning a wheel.

I personally find this explanation somewhat unsatisfying. I (try to)
know the rules and operate by them but don't like my options to be
limited by what the "VFR guys" are //supposed// to be doing. I have
been flying long enough to see plenty of people depart VFR from
uncontrolled airports when they clearly should not have. Also, there
are the scenarios of the snowplow, animal, FOD, runway lights suddenly
going out, etc.

I'm satisfied with the answer found by the poster named Ray who found
the AIM section (5-4-21-g) that describes the procedure for going
around afer DH/MAP. They state quite clearly that the pilot should be
thinking "takeoff", not "missed."

I'm really surprised now that so many people state matter-of-factly
that just flying the missed is appropriate. It may work at 99% of
airports 99% of the time, but it is clearly //not// the right answer.
This is why I originally posted the question -- I didn't know the
answer, but I knew it could not be "just fly the missed." After all, if
you are below DH or past a MAP you are really not even on a charted
segment of the approach.

Another way of looking at is it is that you could actually have just
put the mains on the ground and see a snowplow turn onto the runway,
with your best option to put in power and get back in the air. Missed
approach situation? I think not.

-- dave j

*****
AIM 5-4-21(g)
"Missed approach obstacle clearance is predicated on beginning the
missed approach procedure at the MAP from MDA or DA and then climbing
200 feet/NM or greater. Initiating a go-around after passing the
published MAP may result in total loss of obstacle clearance. To
compensate for the possibility of reduced obstacle clearance during a
go-around, a pilot should apply procedures used in takeoff planning.
Pilots should refer to airport obstacle and departure data prior to
initiating an instrument approach procedure."
*****

I don't think this advises against the use of a missed approach
procedure, it just explains that there is reduced obstacle clearance if
you are beyond the MAP or below the MDA/DH and the pilot should
consider that and become familiar with the obstacles.

Since the missed approach procedure is predicated on a climb gradient
of 200'/NM or greater, consider how long it would take an average
aircraft to intercept that flightpath if the missed was initiated a
little beyond or below the published procedure. I think most could
intercept it by the departure end of the runway, thus ensuring obstacle
clearance throughout. The suggestion of climbing at Vx initially
sounds good if you're concerned.


Chad Speer
PP-ASEL, IA
ATCS, Kansas City ARTCC

"PilotWeb.org" wrote in message
ups.com...
Fly the published missed approach procedure, that is what it is for.


Visit our website for more aviation data, to talk with an expert, view
jobs, post your pilot resume and profile, and read aviation news.


http://PilotWeb.org


And now back to our regularly scheduled program...

I agree with Jose. Your flippant response in spite of the fact that others
had already posted quotes from the AIM to the contrary will not lead me to
your website.

-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

Chad Speer wrote:
*****
AIM 5-4-21(g)
"Missed approach obstacle clearance is predicated on beginning the
missed approach procedure at the MAP from MDA or DA and then climbing
200 feet/NM or greater. Initiating a go-around after passing the
published MAP may result in total loss of obstacle clearance. To
compensate for the possibility of reduced obstacle clearance during a
go-around, a pilot should apply procedures used in takeoff planning.
Pilots should refer to airport obstacle and departure data prior to
initiating an instrument approach procedure."
*****

I don't think this advises against the use of a missed approach
procedure, it just explains that there is reduced obstacle clearance if
you are beyond the MAP or below the MDA/DH and the pilot should
consider that and become familiar with the obstacles.


Yeah, I agree - it all depends on the situation. The same section of
the AIM (5-4-21(c)) indicates that at the minimum circling altitude, the
missed approach can be initiated from anywhere within the circling
approach area - so obviously if you are able to make it back up to the
minimum circling altitude within the circling approach area it will be
safe to execute the missed. But as has been pointed out there are
definitely airports from which it is not possible to execute the missed
approach from below the DH.

During my instrument training we would often do a touch and go before
flying the missed approach in order to log cross country time.

- Ray

Jose,

Your posts here do not inspire confidence in pilotweb.org.


Hehe, just what I was thinking. What kind of experts are that if they
give the wrong answer.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
.. So, I would suspect that the protected area for the missed
approach must also include a climb from the runway elevation. Someone
more familiar with TERPs might be able to verify this assumption.


No protection at all.