*garbled* Go Around!

FlyChicaga

FlyChicaga

Vintage Restoration
I've been thinking, and I'm going to try and post in this forum at least once a week. In our recurrent CRM program, we have "recurrent line-oriented ground school" at the end of the day. It is a precursor to our recurrent line-oriented flight training in the simulator. We no longer do typical PCs for our pilots, but rather a line flight scenario that checks non-technical decision making skills, not only technical proficiency. I believe it is HIGHLY beneficial.

Soooo... I'm going to try and post some scenarios here. These are not events that have happened to me or happened at my company necessarily, but events that have happened at some point in history. Based on a true story if you will.

The scenario:

You are flying an ILS approach to a multiple-runway operation at a major airport. ATC is running simultaneous ILS approaches, while at the same time conducting departures from those runways. You are behind a heavy B767, at the minimum separation.

The weather is 2 miles visibility, light snow, 600 overcast, winds 10 gusting to 15 knots coming from the left. Braking action is fair to good.

At around 800 feet, on the busy tower frequency, you hear a garbled transmission with "GO AROUND, turn left heading 270, climb and maintain 3000." There is no read-back. Another aircraft checks on to the frequency, "Good afternoon tower, Airline 1234, ILS 30R, we need to request a rollout to the end please." Following this transmission, another transmission from ATC is blocked.

Do you go-around? Do you continue the approach? Was the instruction for you?
 
That's a good one!

My first thought is that at 800', you still have a fair amount of time to request clarification from ATC. If the aircraft ahead is disabled on the runway, you won't hit him if you continue descending for the next 30 seconds until you get a positive answer from ATC. Also, one might assume that since ATC didn't use "immediately" in the transmission, there's very little chance that there's a collision hazard with another aircraft on the other approach (TCAS could be used to verify that as well).

So, with the details given so far, I continue until I know it's for me. If I were at 200' my answer would most certainly change, but at 800' we still have time.

EDIT: I should qualify all that by saying that if it wasn't for me, a very real collision hazard could present itself with two aircraft on parallel approaches accepting the same go-around instructions at the same time.
 
FlyChicaga said:
I've been thinking, and I'm going to try and post in this forum at least once a week. In our recurrent CRM program, we have "recurrent line-oriented ground school" at the end of the day. It is a precursor to our recurrent line-oriented flight training in the simulator. We no longer do typical PCs for our pilots, but rather a line flight scenario that checks non-technical decision making skills, not only technical proficiency. I believe it is HIGHLY beneficial.

Soooo... I'm going to try and post some scenarios here. These are not events that have happened to me or happened at my company necessarily, but events that have happened at some point in history. Based on a true story if you will.

The scenario:

You are flying an ILS approach to a multiple-runway operation at a major airport. ATC is running simultaneous ILS approaches, while at the same time conducting departures from those runways. You are behind a heavy B767, at the minimum separation.

The weather is 2 miles visibility, light snow, 600 overcast, winds 10 gusting to 15 knots coming from the left. Braking action is fair to good.

At around 800 feet, on the busy tower frequency, you hear a garbled transmission with "GO AROUND, turn left heading 270, climb and maintain 3000." There is no read-back. Another aircraft checks on to the frequency, "Good afternoon tower, Airline 1234, ILS 30R, we need to request a rollout to the end please." Following this transmission, another transmission from ATC is blocked.

Do you go-around? Do you continue the approach? Was the instruction for you?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm gone on the go-around.
 
I personally would continue the approach. Tell the FO that as soon as there is a break to ask tower to repeat the go around call.

One could assume (which we all know what happens with that) that the second blocked call, was the tower giving instructions to the aircraft that just checked on and the other aircraft (which was given the go around instructions) talking over one another, but I would still want to make sure.

If you did execute a go around, and the plane on the other runway did as well, that could end badly just the same as you continuing the approach if it were for you. I think you would have enough time to verify the directions were for you before causing a disaster.
 
I think a lot of the decision on this one involves the amount of SA you have of the situation at hand. If you know simultaneous ops are in use and there's another guy on approach at the same time as you that would factor heavily into the decision. For me, I am still going to continue the approach for a few hundred feet and make an attempt to re-contact tower for clarification. I'm not going to immediately execute a missed for the potential of the two aircraft close by performing same missed procedure issue. In any case I don't think I see anything there in the scenario that jumps out at me that I have to go missed right that second. It could serve to compund matters worse than what caused whoever got the go around call in the first place.

Some of the considerations for me: Do I have working TCAS, what's going on with other planes there? What's the DA? If it's the standard 200ft then I still have 400ft on the approach itself and may break out of the soup and possibly see for myself what's going on. Was there another plane next to me shooting an approach to a parallel runway? Is this a PRM ILS scenario?
 
SA and airport layout play into it. If you've been on tower freq long enough to have time to develop a picture of what is going on you will have at least some idea of what you're up against. So my main consideration would be are there multiple approaches/departures on converging/intersecting runways? If the missed approach instruction is misunderstood, is there a risk of running into somebody if two guys climb out at the same time? Is there any harm in continuing to mins to get a look at the runway for yourself, if anybody's on it, etc?

At 800 feet you still have more than a minute to touchdown, plenty of time to clarify. Until proven otherwise, doing nothing at all can be the best choice. This is a very good question FlyChicaga.
 
I think the whole point of this is SA. Sure, you have some time untill you get down to 200' but what if another plane has veered off the LOC course and is converging with you?

Am I on an inboard or outboard runway? Me personally, If coming in on an inboard and I hear go around to the left, i can guarantee you i wont be making that turn untill im damn sure its for me. And odds are, its not for me, especially running parallel approaches. In my mind making a left turn and potentially hitting someone on a parallel approach is a much greater hazard than continuing the approach and waiting for clarification.

Now, if i was on the outboard, a whole different story.


Edit: Im flying into DFW, so i just wait till i see the FAROS, now im completely safe :P
 
FlyChicaga said:
Do you go-around? Do you continue the approach? Was the instruction for you?
Click to expand...

The situation is not clear and neither is the clearance. While you want to maintain safety you also do not want to waste company resources (fuel, time, pax connections). Continue to mins and if by mins, situation is still not verified, go around.

Appending your call to ATC with your callsign often helps. "BigTown Tower, ABC123, verify cleared to land ABC123." That way if your transmission is again stepped on at least a part of it may get through.
 
jhugz said:
Yeah, I'm gone on the go-around.
Click to expand...
Me too. I'm history. I can fly another ILS. Connections and extra fuel be damned, I promised my wife I'd come home from the trip.

This might be for loss of separation with the 767 that was in front of you...for some reason you might be overtaking him. I wouldn't want to continue and rear end a 767.

I'm out...get climbing then call "Tower, F.I.G.J.A.M. 420's going around was that turn for us?"

If not, they'll give you another instruction and you live to fly another ILS. If so then comply with the clearance.

-mini
 
minitour said:
Me too. I'm history. I can fly another ILS. Connections and extra fuel be damned, I promised my wife I'd come home from the trip.

This might be for loss of separation with the 767 that was in front of you...for some reason you might be overtaking him. I wouldn't want to continue and rear end a 767.

I'm out...get climbing then call "Tower, F.I.G.J.A.M. 420's going around was that turn for us?"

If not, they'll give you another instruction and you live to fly another ILS. If so then comply with the clearance.

-mini
Click to expand...



Its kinda hard to make it home when you hit a plane on a parallel approach...
 
I would definitely ask for clarification before making the go around. It could get very ugly if both you and the pilot on the other runway made the go around.
 
cmill said:
Its kinda hard to make it home when you hit a plane on a parallel approach...
Click to expand...

Well, Mini said he would go around, but not start the turn until confirming with tower so chances are he would not hit the aircraft on the parallel approach.


I agree with the fuel be damned statement.... I will do my best to arrive on time and save you fuel, but I'm not gonna die trying to save you money.
 
minitour said:
Me too. I'm history. I can fly another ILS. Connections and extra fuel be damned, I promised my wife I'd come home from the trip.

This might be for loss of separation with the 767 that was in front of you...for some reason you might be overtaking him. I wouldn't want to continue and rear end a 767.
Click to expand...

You turned your TCAS OFF? TCAS inop?
 
dc3flyer said:
Well, Mini said he would go around, but not start the turn until confirming with tower so chances are he would not hit the aircraft on the parallel approach.


I agree with the fuel be damned statement.... I will do my best to arrive on time and save you fuel, but I'm not gonna die trying to save you money.
Click to expand...


Im just saying, maybe the safest option is to do nothing. What if every pilot coming into land decided to start a go around without knowing if the call was for him? What if theres converging/intersecting ILS's? If that were the case, you wouldn't even need to make a turn to cause a problem, just climbing would be enough.

I just really don't like the idea of bombing around in the clouds with 6 other planes all within a mile of each other, especially if they all decided that last call was for them.

If the go around call was extremely urgent, im sure ATC would keep barking it untill they saw the plane do what they want it to do.

Remember, you've got 200 feet till you're presumabley out of the clouds, and can see whats goin on. and another 600 till mins. Ill take the chances of runnin over the 767 in the span of 300ft.
 
cmill said:
Im just saying, maybe the safest option is to do nothing. What if every pilot coming into land decided to start a go around without knowing if the call was for him? What if theres converging/intersecting ILS's? If that were the case, you wouldn't even need to make a turn to cause a problem, just climbing would be enough.
Click to expand...
What if the moon were made of cheese?

No seriously, if you're on a converging ILS what are the chances that ATC gives you a climbing turn on a go around? You're probably going to fly the published missed approach until TRACON can figure out what to do to you.

I just really don't like the idea of bombing around in the clouds with 6 other planes all within a mile of each other, especially if they all decided that last call was for them.
Click to expand...
Then you should probably avoid going into the biggest airports in the country. Lots of planes on final simultaneously and/or in position/taking off. Sometimes people get confused and think the transmission is for them.

If the go around call was extremely urgent, im sure ATC would keep barking it untill they saw the plane do what they want it to do.
Click to expand...
You're willing to bet your life on that? I'm not. I've seen ATC screw up. Funny thing is that when ATC messes up, the pilot dies. When the pilot messes up, the pilot dies.

...I don't play that game.

Remember, you've got 200 feet till you're presumabley out of the clouds, and can see whats goin on. and another 600 till mins. Ill take the chances of runnin over the 767 in the span of 300ft.
Click to expand...
Could have been something else. That was just one possibility. The garbled transmission could have been anything.

-mini
 
Ok, Parallel approaches... which approach are you on? If you get a heading of 270, and you're on the 35L approach, that makes perfect sense. If you're on 35R... something ain't right and you need to clarify anyways because you'd be turning into another ILS.

So if I'm on the left side, I'm gone. If it's not for me, then tower's mistake and should have ensured a proper call. If I'm on the right side, I'm checking as turning could be a greater hazard.
 
ProudPilot said:
Ok, Parallel approaches... which approach are you on? If you get a heading of 270, and you're on the 35L approach, that makes perfect sense. If you're on 35R... something ain't right and you need to clarify anyways because you'd be turning into another ILS.

So if I'm on the left side, I'm gone. If it's not for me, then tower's mistake and should have ensured a proper call. If I'm on the right side, I'm checking as turning could be a greater hazard.
Click to expand...
Actually that's a good point.

What if you're on the ILS 28R? A 10 degree turn may be where Tower wants you and his plans for a 28L miss could be a left to 250 or left to 200.

Good point. I still don't like the idea of going downhill in the clag when ATC wants someone unknown to go around and it could be me...but it's probably a SA issue. I shouldn't have jumped the gun.

My usually answer "we need more info" really applied here.

-mini
 
Coming from the perspective of a guy who currently flies C402s into a very busy jet terminal area, it doesn't matter if you're on the left or right side. Being on the left side could just as easily cause a collision hazard if I take the same heading and altitude assignment as a jet on the right, even if he's spaced a mile and a half back on the parallel. The speeds and turn radii are very different. On a go-around, my profile is Vy (~95-112 KIAS depending on weight), and if I'm light and starting from 130-140 KIAS below 1000' AGL, I can still do 2000-2500 fpm up to the assigned altitude without much effort. If a jet also does the same procedure at the same time, now there's a very large speed difference between us and a very large problem.

That's why I would personally continue and request clarification from ATC. Barring a flying saucer materializing on the ILS, there's simply not a whole lot that will cause an immediate hazard to me at 800' to warrant an instant go-around. YMMV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top