Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Explanation

  • 20-05-2015 10:26pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭


    Hi, I was out at Dublin Airport this evening about 8pm. I was near the Terminal 2 carpark when i looked up and noticed a plane coming in to land but then back off and went straight back up again. I waited about 10-15 mins and it came back around again and landed. It was a Star Airlines plane. I know planes abort landings due to windy landing conditions or icey runways but it was perfect weather conditions. Any explanation?


Comments

  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    It doesn't have to be weather related. The aircraft in front may have been slow to vacate the runway, the cabin may not have been ready (but that was a cargo flight) etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Tony Beetroot


    Nim wrote: »
    the cabin may not have been ready

    Why come in to land?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 821 ✭✭✭eatmyshorts


    Why come in to land?

    Eg someone out of their seat, or a medical emergency, or someone decided to get up and go to the bathroom at 1000ft. Sounds unusual... But I've done a go around for all of those reasons in the last 18 months.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭Reoil


    Officer999 wrote: »
    icey runways

    The airport would be closed if this was the case.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 10,020 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Reoil wrote: »
    The airport would be closed if this was the case.

    You're missing what he was saying, read again.


    To the OP, could be many reasons for the go around. While you say the wather was perfect, it could well be that the aircraft caught a strong gust of crosswind at 200 ft, undetectable to ground observers.
    Very hard to figure out the reason unless someone heard the aircraft explaining to ATC. At least with a passenger flight the flight deck will in most cases make an explanation to the customers.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭Reoil


    Officer999 wrote: »
    I know planes abort landings due to windy landing conditions or icey runways but it was perfect weather conditions. Any explanation?
    Tenger wrote: »
    You're missing what he was saying, read again.

    No I'm not. I'm just making the observation that if the runway was icy, then the airport would be closed.
    Planes wouldn't be aborting landings, they would be diverted instead.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Growler!!!


    Depends on the results of the braking action test or friction coefficient in respect to contaminated runways.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭Reoil


    Growler!!! wrote: »
    Depends on the results of the braking action test or friction coefficient in respect to contaminated runways.

    True, but this would define whether the airport remains open or closed.
    It's a binary decision - if closed, diversion - if open, why would a go around be required? Other than perhaps another plane hasn't vacated the runway in time, but sure that could happen any time...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Growler!!!


    Reoil wrote: »
    True, but this would define whether the airport remains open or closed.

    Depends on company SOP's. I've departed an airport after the braking action test when the result was within our company limit but not for another company parked beside us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,581 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Reoil wrote: »
    The airport would be closed if this was the case.

    No, it wouldn't

    There would be no landings until the runway was treated, but the airport wouldn't close unless the issue was effectively untreatable (due to continued frozen precipitation, etc)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭de biz


    The go around in this instance was caused by Ethiad which had been cleared to take off R/W 28 but then announced he required 30 seconds more on the runway.

    The controller was left with no option but to instruct the Star Air B767 to go around.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 63 ✭✭Nortcider


    de biz wrote: »
    The go around in this instance was caused by Ethiad which had been cleared to take off R/W 28 but then announced he required 30 seconds more on the runway.

    The controller was left with no option but to instruct the Star Air B767 to go around.

    I heard that as well. The tower controller (female) sounded a bit exasperated. I wonder if it was her that was involved in the BA incident a while back. Very similar circumstances.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    Nortcider wrote: »
    I heard that as well. The tower controller (female) sounded a bit exasperated. I wonder if it was her that was involved in the BA incident a while back. Very similar circumstances.

    Ha! I remember her, the legend! I'm paraphrasing from (rusty) memory but I believe the BA exchange went like this:
    NOW NIGEL, YOU'RE VERY VERY BOLD, GO TO THE BACK OF THE RUNWAY AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE DONE!


Advertisement