Are Go Arounds Standard

NewApproach

I was on a flight from Dublin to Heathrow last Tuesday week. We were very close to touching down when the pilot took off again and went back into the holding pattern. Pilot came on the PA and said 'sorry about that, there was another plane on the runway'. :eek: Is that standard?

cruais

Its more common than you think! It can be quite frightening but obviously its the best choice in order to avoid the inevitable

NewApproach

Jesus. Best avoid a situation I suppose but you'd have thought ATC would be aware of something like that a bit earlier!

Bummer1234

It happens quite often yes, I was travelling from Dublin to gatwick before and we done the very same as you said op.

Was coming down and engines roared up and up we went. Pilot said there was a plane on the runway so we couldn't land...I didn't know how to feel really at the time but we went around and down in around 15 mins.

Cessna_Pilot

Go arounds are much more common than people think. In the past 12 months I've had 4 go arounds. All into Dublin. All related to other aircraft being slow to vacate the active runway, and one where an ATR taxiied onto the runway despite being told to hold short!


Always brief the "other option is to land"

St. Leibowitz

Happens quite frequently, especially at airports with single runways which are used for takeoff and landing. If there are parallel runways, the situation is better, but it still happens.

If the same runways is used for takeoff and landing, the volume of traffic is higher, and if an aircraft is slow vacating, or lines up and then is slow to commence their roll, the aircraft on final can get into a conflict situation very quickly. It's not dangerous, although it can feel uncomfortable, or even terrifying for some people when in the back and any unexpected event occurs.

Go arounds are standard, and briefed before approach commences. There are specific flightpaths to be followed in the event of one happening, and they are considered an inconvenience by pilots rather than a problem. I saw three in the same day from my office window in Dublin a few years ago.

IRLConor

NewApproach wrote: »

Jesus. Best avoid a situation I suppose but you'd have thought ATC would be aware of something like that a bit earlier!

Heathrow is extremely busy so they have the landings spaced pretty tightly. If a plane is slow to move off the runway then ATC can't give a huge amount of prior warning.

folbotcar

As this subject comes up so often maybe there should be a sticky about it?

Go arounds are not dangerous. To put it simply your aircraft went around because another aircraft was slow to exit to runway. It doesn't mean they came close. In fact that's just the point. The rules allow for a certain separation between aircraft on approach. So you will have a situation where one is landing as another is on finals and another behind that. It works well unless the landing aircraft fails to exit the runway quickly enough. Maybe they missed the exit.

Meanwhile the next aircraft continues the approach with the pilots and ATC fully aware that the runway isn't clear yet and that would be from quite a long way out. ATC will now no doubt be using words like 'Expedite please' while the pilots will be using less polite terms. If the errant plane clears the runway in time, all is well. If not a go around is initated much to the irritation of ATC, the pilots and the terror of the passengers as the aircraft 'plunges' back into the sky.

The reason you can get quite low is that every opportunity is taken to make the landing. Sometimes to no avail and around you go again. Do not think your aircraft scraped paint with the one on the ground or that the people on board ducked in terror as you roared overhead. It's never that close.

Other reasons for go arounds are windy weather when the pilot flying decides it's a bit too rough this time. Another reason which is less common now but used to be the main reason for go arounds is bad visibility. Modern airliners are well equipped and can land in fairly low visibility but there are limits and a go around is initiated if the runway is not seen.

In fact an example of why go arounds are safe can be seen with the recent Cork Airport crash. On three approaches they went below the minimum altitude in bad visibility. The went around on the first two. On the third they didn't.

Go arounds are just an inconvenience.

roundymac

Yes was on flight from LHR-ORK when at the last second the pilot did a missed aproach because, "quote", some cloud rolled in and they lost sight of the runway. No big deal and no sign of any one getting nervous or anything, I think most people would not have noticed only that the pilot made an anouncement.

kub

roundymac wrote: »

Yes was on flight from LHR-ORK when at the last second the pilot did a missed aproach because, "quote", some cloud rolled in and they lost sight of the runway. No big deal and no sign of any one getting nervous or anything, I think most people would not have noticed only that the pilot made an anouncement.

Well regarding Cork, it is on top of a hill so low clouds are not a surprise i suppose.

Growler!!!

roundymac wrote: »

Yes was on flight from LHR-ORK when at the last second the pilot did a missed aproach because, "quote", some cloud rolled in and they lost sight of the runway. No big deal and no sign of any one getting nervous or anything, I think most people would not have noticed only that the pilot made an anouncement.

kub wrote: »

Well regarding Cork, it is on top of a hill so low clouds are not a surprise i suppose.

Corks famous "High Speed Fog":D

the beerhunter

folbotcar wrote: »

ATC will now no doubt be using words like 'Expedite please'

a good controller won't say 'please'. we're supposed to issue instructions, not requests.

FWVT

Every approach should be assumed a go-around, and only if everything looks right should the go-around be aborted (i.e. decide to land).

A go-around is a sign of a good pilot, not a bad one. A bad pilot will continue with the landing regardless.

Dublinflyer

Different airports have different rules for staying on the runway. For example LHR has the following in it's charts,

"Pilots are reminded that rapid exit from the landing runway enables ATC to apply minimum spacing on final approach that will achieve maximum runway utilization and will minimize the occurrence of 'go-arounds'"

There can also be regulations around where you exit the runway, usually the rapid exit taxiway and if you don't get any exit instructions it is the one ATC are expecting you to use and plan movements around it. If you miss the rapid exit you are expected to keep the speed well up until you do exit, safely, and generally you are asked why you missed the expected exit point.

We have something that specific in the Dublin AIP and it is good airmanship to get clear as soon as you can.

Dublinflyer

My bad, that's what I get for typing and having a phone conversation at the same time. Edited to reflect what I meant to say. So much for my multi-tasking abilities!

John_Mc

the beerhunter wrote: »

a good controller won't say 'please'. we're supposed to issue instructions, not requests.

What a ridiculous statement.

Good controllers will have manners, and time permitting, will use pleasantries such as "good day", "please", "thank you". Whether they do or not has no bearing on their ability as a controller.

And just to clarify, the pilot in command can reject the instruction if they see fit. Seems more like a request to me :pac:

Simon Gruber Says

Expedite is a request, not an instruction. It's basically "please do this quickly if you are able and if it's safe for you to do so"

Dublinflyer

Everything an ATCO says always comes with the "if safe to do so" condition. Being polite is a human thing but everything that is said to someone on the ground, in an aircraft or ops vehicle, by ATC is an instruction. If you are unable to follow that instruction, as is often the case for various reasons, you will be asked to explain the reason so other traffic can be routed accordingly. If the ATCO is not happy s/he can issue an MOR and it will be followed up at a later date.

St. Leibowitz

Just had an Aer Lingus A320 pass over my house. That's unusual, so went to Flightradar and it's EI403 from FCO (Rome). It did a go around and a sharp left which brought it out of the other traffic. Should I report it to the Daily Mail ?? They'd get a good story pout of it I'm sure

folbotcar

'Expedite please' wasn't a verbatim quote, you know! I was merely illustrating the likely polite request of the controller versus the possibly more robust comments from the inbound crew!

Besides controllers do diverge from the script at appropriate times. They're not robots. Many is the time I've been bid good morning or good evening by name followed by a comment or two.

Dublinflyer

I think it depends on how busy it is. I have noticed that in the morning when it's it is all business but it gets a bit more relaxed during the quieter part of the day. It varies from controller to controller. There is one in particular who seems to have a bit of a laugh in her tone at times! There are others who are very matter of fact all of the time.

the beerhunter

Simon Gruber Says wrote: »

Expedite is a request, not an instruction.

the word "expedite" implies urgency. "please" tacked onto anything makes the request sound optional. i'm all for keeping things civilised - i actually feel a little bad in hindsight when i hit a busy spell and forget to throw in a farewell on frequency transfer, john mc. i do indulge in banter when something daft occurs on frequency. but i also cringe when i overhear certain other controllers effectively begging with their pleas for compliance rather than *telling* aircraft what needs to be done to stop them bumping off each other and generally keep things moving.

to address the original post, think of every landing as an abandoned go-around.

NewApproach wrote: »

you'd have thought ATC would be aware of something like that a bit earlier!

sometimes the go around is because the tower controller was too ambitious lining up a departure, sometimes because the approach controller got the arrival gap wrong, sometimes because the flight crew weren't teed up to get off runway as quickly as possible (vertically or horizontally). the "inevitable" alluded to by cruais in post #2 is actually very evitable (is that a word?) as the pilots always have the option of pulling out if their sense of self-preservation is reached before the tower controller's sense of comfort.

folbotcar

Beer hunter I sympathise. The nature of my flying job is that I'm on frequency, sometimes all day. I hear it all and cringe sometimes not just at private pilots but so called pros who embarrass themselves. Sometimes my fingers hover over the PTT just wanting to make a sarky comment. But glass houses and all that.