How often do you...

How often do you brief your airframe's go around profile/procedures during your approach briefings?

  • Never

    Votes: 21 27.3%
  • Rarely

    Votes: 28 36.4%
  • Frequently

    Votes: 13 16.9%
  • Always

    Votes: 15 19.5%

  • Total voters
    77
At my shop, we only brief the callouts for CAT II and III approaches.

@typhoonpilot is spot on with his commentary:

Where go-arounds tend to go wrong is when they are not from minimums. A go-around from 1000 feet or 2000 feet AFE tends to get screwed up pretty easily based on my observations. The reason being is in the simulator, as BobD stated, we do a fair amount of low level go-around so the muscle memory and verbal calls tends to be pretty well ingrained. We don't tend to practice go-arounds from 1000 feet AFE though.


To further expand this line of discussion, it also should be stated that in the simulator environment, we all know the go-around is coming at some point. We are primed and ready to push the TOGA button and recite our callouts. However, in the real world, how primed are we for a go-around on every approach. On approaches where the weather is close to minimums, probably so. But what about beautiful VMC days? Are we mentally ready for the unexpected go-around? How many of us guard the TOGA and Autopilot Disconnect buttons below 1000 AFE. It's SOP at my airline, but I see a fair amount of non-compliance...

Regarding go-arounds from above 1000 AFE, another reason they seem to get screwed up is perhaps we as a group aren't mentally prepared for a go-around from a non-minimums altitude. We do train "soft" go-arounds above 1000 AFE in the sim, but not near to the extent of go-arounds from minimums. I think it is something that should possibly get a little more emphasis as the soft go-around from above 1000 AFE is a very, very simple maneuver in my fleet.

Back to the original topic, I rarely brief the go-around callouts. That being said, after reading the first post and the subsequent comments, I am taking a very hard look at trying to include the callouts in my briefings. After seeing a couple of ugly go-arounds from the PM seat, where the main thing missing were the PF callouts, briefing them at least once per crew pairing or once per leg doesn't seem like a bad idea.
 
I can't remember the SOP at the airline but it should have been done more often. Even though it was clear and a million 99% of the time we had to go around from being beaten by winds or something on the runway. We didn't go around enough though and it looked like a slapping contest trying to configure the airplane.
 
I think the Go around brief, by exception when there is something weird, is a good thing. Because, especially in the world of low MAP climb constraints and RNP approaches, just the standard missed approach may get you in some trouble.
 
Briefing how to do a go-around is the same as briefing how to take-off.. "Ok, you'll call V1 and Vr and I'll pullback then you say positive rate.. Any questions"


Don't brief how to fly a plane please, people.
 
Briefing how to do a go-around is the same as briefing how to take-off.. "Ok, you'll call V1 and Vr and I'll pullback then you say positive rate.. Any questions"


Don't brief how to fly a plane please, people.

It depends on the type of aircraft you're flying.

I could show you a missed approach where if you really didn't think about what you were doing, it wouldn't turn out well.

Plus, a lot of folks screw it up.
 
Briefing how to do a go-around is the same as briefing how to take-off.. "Ok, you'll call V1 and Vr and I'll pullback then you say positive rate.. Any questions"


Don't brief how to fly a plane please, people.
You takeoff every leg and it should be routine.

Going missed or around is not routine at all and can be shrouded in some cobwebs that can lead to same mistakes that could be avoided with a quick 30 second briefing.
 
It's not rocket science. Announce the go around. Takeoff flap setting. Climb up gear up. Lnav. It matters not what airplane you are flying.

The 747 is just like the RJ and so on.
 
It's not rocket science. Announce the go around. Takeoff flap setting. Climb up gear up. Lnav. It matters not what airplane you are flying.

The 747 is just like the RJ and so on.

By that metric, a RTO is not rocket science. Announce the reject. Reverse thrust. Maximum braking. Stop the aircraft. It matters not what airplane you are flying.


Yet, the RTO is included in every takeoff briefing...
 
Bingo.

Or a rejected landing. Those are always fun.

You're past the "missed approach point" and tower says "GO AROUND! NARWHAL ON THE RUNWAY!".

What do you do? What…. do you do… :)

We are now training for that in the sim.

Not that difficult of a maneuver, but it can have some little quirks.

Don't want to do one though...
 
By that metric, a RTO is not rocket science. Announce the reject. Reverse thrust. Maximum braking. Stop the aircraft. It matters not what airplane you are flying.


Yet, the RTO is included in every takeoff briefing...
Another over-briefed item. "Standard reject criteria" will suffice. What you reject for or when never really changes. "Below v1 I'll reject for anything." Yeah. We know. That's the point of v1.
 
There is no requirement where I work to do so and I use to not do it. I've recently changed that, however, and try to throw it in once per day but at a minimum on the first leg of the trip (I normally fly that one). They are rarely done (probably once a year in the sim), and I've had a few cases of new FO's being behind when I've done them in the sim, thus my change.

That's not a bad idea. I probably did 10 real go arounds in my 8 years at XJT and probably only one of them was textbook. The rest of them weren't bad, but certainly not pretty.
 
Another over-briefed item. "Standard reject criteria" will suffice. What you reject for or when never really changes. "Below v1 I'll reject for anything." Yeah. We know. That's the point of v1.

Probably the third most fouled up thing is rejects (after unstable approaches and botched go-arounds) and why you reject or continue. Some more food for thought.

Being intentional about our actions and not half assing it would fix many of the more spectacular acts of dumbassery.
 
Probably the third most fouled up thing is rejects (after unstable approaches and botched go-arounds) and why you reject or continue. Some more food for thought.

Being intentional about our actions and not half assing it would fix many of the more spectacular acts of dumbassery.
So, repeating "I'll reject for anything below v1, after that I'll reject for a fire, engine failure, predictive windshear or the aircraft is unable or unsafe to fly, other wise we will treat it as in flight emergency" before every takeoff will change that? That helps?

Look, I'm all for briefing. I'm just more of a 'put some thought into it' kind of guy. Briefing how you do a go-around isn't useful knowledge to most. If you feel like you need to bone up on how to do it, then by all means brief it, in your head.. And regurgitating the same "below v1" mantra in every departure brief helps no one either. I've got unfortunate, real news for ya. By the 45 second mark in your brief you are being tuned out. I know. It's hard to believe but it's true. We are all professionals here. Speak with intention. Don't just mutter stuff about the flight that you've rote memorized or that you're reading off the charts... Keep it concise. Keep it pertinent. Discuss the specific threats. Hit the high lights and don't try to teach the professionals next to you how to fly a jet in a 2 minute brief.
 
Last edited:
Another over-briefed item. "Standard reject criteria" will suffice. What you reject for or when never really changes. "Below v1 I'll reject for anything." Yeah. We know. That's the point of v1.

Brake temps? Window sliding open? Thrust not set? :)

Surely you jest. Unless you're trolling, then I gotta check that IP.
 
Back
Top