Delta did a Go-Around

It would be fun to take CLE to your local Class D airport some days.

Some days they're awful, some days they're pitiful.

-mini
 
Kristie said:
question....if you were practically at the end of the runway and turning off of it, why would ATC tell the other plane to go around? don't they have enough clearance to land at that point?
Click to expand...
You've gotta be entirely off the runway.
 
dcramer16 said:
A situation occured tonight that I have never run into, I think I handled it as best as I could, but feel free to give your opinion.
I was flying to CLE tonight in a Baron. I was on a downwind for 28 and was cleared for the visual. I entered a base. I saw another aircraft at my 2 o'clock. I couldn't tell if it was on final for 28 or 24R cause of the angle but I kept my speed up anyways. After I switched to tower and was cleared to land, the other aircraft checked on. It was a Delta flight and was also cleared to land on 28, number 2. They were told to reduce speed, and they were closing in fast. I kept my speed up and didn't drop my flaps or gear till the last possible minute. When I touched down I taxied about 60kts down the runway to try and get off at the end as quick as possible. The other taxiways were closed due to maintenance. Just as I was about to turn off the runway I heard the controller get on and tell Delta to go-around. I felt terrible that a Delta flight had to go-around, but I think I did everything I could do to try and get out of the way. I think Cleveland could have done a better job of sequencing, but I still felt bad that that happened to them. It would have been easier for me to go around instead, but I was already almost to the end of the runway when tower told them to go around, otherwise I would have offered. I can't really think of anything I could have done differently. What do you guys think? I bet there's a couple p***ed off Delta pilots tonight!
Click to expand...

It sounds like you did everything you could! Anyone would appreciate that effort. If you had some other taxiways NOT closed by construction, there would have been no go around.

Even in the airline world, a go-around is not an emergency procedure. Sure, they don't happen often, but it's not that big of a deal. No bruised ego's, no one pi**ed off. Everyone can do it.

If it was a Mad Dog it probably cost 2K (pounds) in Jet A but I would hang that on approach, not you.

I was one of three go-arounds there one day because approach would not give us lower when we asked. The CAL -800 behind us was really mad when approach asked, "say reason for go-around".. The response? "Because you couldn't give us lower sweetheart".

I wouldn't worry about it one bit, especially when you did everything you could.

Bill
 
Kristie said:
question....if you were practically at the end of the runway and turning off of it, why would ATC tell the other plane to go around? don't they have enough clearance to land at that point?
Click to expand...

I cannot quote exact regs but it is my understanding that if plane A is on the RW in any way, shape, or form you cannot land plane B. If soemthing were to happen with A causing it to be stuck on the RW and B landed you would be setting up for a much bigger problem.
 
I don't see the problem. You did what you were instructed to do. If I understand the details correctly, you were in assigned sequence, kept your speed up and exited at the first available. What else would have been called for? If the Delta pilots are angry with you then that would be very misplaced. The tower never told you that you did anything wrong, correct? It's OK to be empathetic that others were inconvenienced but there was nothing you could have done so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
 
Heck I don't get to do a go around all that often. I don't think I would mind all that much really. Safety first. You did your job and the DL guys did theirs. I doubt they minded all that much (unless the captain had a commute home he was late to). :) Fly safe out there.
 
JEP said:
I cannot quote exact regs but it is my understanding that if plane A is on the RW in any way, shape, or form you cannot land plane B. If soemthing were to happen with A causing it to be stuck on the RW and B landed you would be setting up for a much bigger problem.
Click to expand...

yeah I think so too, but I remember reading on a 8000+ runway, if the plane is like past 5000 mark or something the other can land, but I can't remember where I read it, so scratch that.
 
Boy was I wrong.

I just looked up the separation minimums in the 7110.65S (http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/at_orders/media/Basic7110.65S.pdf)

Under section 3-10-3 Same Runway Separation, I found the following:

7110.65S Section 3-10-3 said:
3-10-3. SAME RUNWAY SEPARATION​

a.
Separate an arriving aircraft from another
aircraft using the same runway by ensuring that the
arriving aircraft does not cross the landing threshold
until one of the following conditions exists or unless
authorized in para 3-10-10, Altitude Restricted Low
Approach.
1. ​

​

The other aircraft has landed and is clear of
the runway. (See FIG 3-10-1.) Between sunrise and
sunset, if you can determine distances by reference to
suitable landmarks and the other aircraft has landed,
it need not be clear of the runway if the following
minimum distance from the landing threshold exists:
REFERENCE​

​

P/​

CG Term- Clear of the Runway.
FIG 3-10-1
Same Runway Separation
(a) ​

​

When a Category I aircraft is landing
behind a Category I or II- 3,000 feet.
(See FIG 3-10-2.)
FIG 3-10-2
Same Runway Separation
(b) ​

​

When a Category II aircraft is landing
behind a Category I or II- 4,500 feet.
(See FIG 3-10-3.)
FIG 3-10-3
Same Runway Separation
2. ​

​

The other aircraft has departed and crossed
the runway end. (See FIG 3-10-4). If you can
determine distances by reference to suitable
landmarks and the other aircraft is airborne, it need
not have crossed the runway end if the following
minimum distance from the landing threshold exists:
(a) ​

​

Category I aircraft landing behind
Category I or II- 3,000 feet.
(b) ​

​

Category II aircraft landing behind
Category I or II- 4,500 feet.
(c) ​

​

When either is a category III aircraft-
6,000 feet​

​

. (See FIG 3-10-5.)
FIG 3-10-4​
Same Runway Separation​
Click to expand...


​
 
I could care less if another aircraft goes around. Although you think it was because of you, it was not. Even if it is a cessna 172 it has as much right to be at a class B airport as I do. The best you can do is fly your profile and if they ask for best forward speed then do what you can and thats it.

1. It is the controllers job to seperate you, if they think you will be too slow they can give you delay vectors and put you in behind.

2. When following a smaller slower aircraft youd be surprised how slow we can go if need be. Not that I like it but if asked for final approach speed now I can maintain 120-130 from ten miles out if they want it. There is alot that can be done to make this work. Speed you up, slow them down but the bottom line is I could definately care less about making someone go around.

but....if you land and are slowed by the 1000' markers and then turn off at the end of a 10,000' runway...thats your fault and you owe them a beer.
 
Polar742 said:
Boy was I wrong.

I just looked up the separation minimums in the 7110.65S (http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/at_orders/media/Basic7110.65S.pdf)

Under section 3-10-3 Same Runway Separation, I found the following:



[/left]
Originally Posted by 7110.65S Section 3-10-3
3-10-3. SAME RUNWAY SEPARATION​

a.
Separate an arriving aircraft from another
aircraft using the same runway by ensuring that the
arriving aircraft does not cross the landing threshold
until one of the following conditions exists or unless
authorized in para 3-10-10, Altitude Restricted Low
Approach.
1. ​

​

The other aircraft has landed and is clear of
the runway. (See FIG 3-10-1.) Between sunrise and
sunset, if you can determine distances by reference to
suitable landmarks and the other aircraft has landed,
it need not be clear of the runway if the following
minimum distance from the landing threshold exists:
REFERENCE​

​

P/​

CG Term- Clear of the Runway.
FIG 3-10-1
Same Runway Separation
(a) ​

​

When a Category I aircraft is landing
behind a Category I or II- 3,000 feet.
(See FIG 3-10-2.)
FIG 3-10-2
Same Runway Separation
(b) ​

​

When a Category II aircraft is landing
behind a Category I or II- 4,500 feet.
(See FIG 3-10-3.)
FIG 3-10-3
Same Runway Separation
2. ​

​

The other aircraft has departed and crossed
the runway end. (See FIG 3-10-4). If you can
determine distances by reference to suitable
landmarks and the other aircraft is airborne, it need
not have crossed the runway end if the following
minimum distance from the landing threshold exists:
(a) ​

​

Category I aircraft landing behind
Category I or II- 3,000 feet.
(b) ​

​

Category II aircraft landing behind
Category I or II- 4,500 feet.
(c) ​

​

When either is a category III aircraft-
6,000 feet​

​

. (See FIG 3-10-5.)
FIG 3-10-4​
Same Runway Separation​
Click to expand...


There it is.... I've been cleared to land quite a few times where there have been another aircraft on the landing rollout. Of course it's always ultimately my call wether to determine if it's safe or not, no matter what the controllers clear me to do.;)
 
I always thought a jet go-around was very very very rare. So now I feel much better knowing it's only rare, thanks! ATC didn't tell me to keep my speed up, which is wierd. That is why at first I thought the aircraft was landing 24R instead of 28. I have had many times where ATC put me in front of a jet and it wasn't a problem, I just keep the speed up to at least 150. But this guy was RIGHT behind me.
 
dcramer16 said:
I always thought a jet go-around was very very very rare. So now I feel much better knowing it's only rare, thanks! ATC didn't tell me to keep my speed up, which is wierd. That is why at first I thought the aircraft was landing 24R instead of 28. I have had many times where ATC put me in front of a jet and it wasn't a problem, I just keep the speed up to at least 150. But this guy was RIGHT behind me.
Click to expand...

Chances are if it was that close, the DAL crew was already anticipating a go around so it makes it even easier to execute. You did nothing wrong, in fact you did everything right.

As a side note, CLE ATC has enough trouble with 24L/24R flow. Everytime they use 28 I get the feeling they are a bit out of their comfort zone. I think everytime I land on that runway something is a bit abnormal.
 
Certainly wont be the last time Delta, or any airline, performs a Go-Around.

Regular occurance in Atlanta, even on CAVOK days.
 
You'd been cleared to land and the runway was yours. If ATC screws up spacing (pretty common in CLE, their ATC is bad) and put someone on your tail they can ask to plan minimal time on the runway, put I'd never slam on the brakes or cause distress to the passengers. I'll do my best to get off, but I'm not putting tray table imprints on faces in the back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top