Too high. Go Around. What's your PA?
- Thread starter Center_Mid
- Start date
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
I actually asked Al Haynes (Captain of United 232 crash in Sioux City) what process determined what he told his passengers, and how he'd look at that in the future.
His answer was useful, and it's what I abide by.
Don't tell them anything they don't need to know if it's something they can't do anything about it.
In other words, just be vague, if anything, and let it be. There's nothing they can do so worrying them unnecessarily doesn't help.
If someone asks, just say something to the point "Overall, we just didn't like the way things were coming together. There was never any real danger, but we decided that it was probably just safer to come around and make sure things were a little more perfect. Safety first."
Blame it on that oh-so-pilot 'gut feeling' that something wasn't quite right and you decided to err on the side of safety. I had a Captain do that once on an ILS in IMC. All the data looked right- the numbers looked right, but he was slightly above glideslope, and for some reason, things just seemed to be taking forever.
Rather than assume we hadn't made a mistake, he just executed a missed approach. What did he tell the pax?
"Things just weren't as perfect as they could have been. My gut was telling me that wasn't good enough, so we came around and did it again."
Passengers thanked us on the way off the plane. Some of the more aviation knowledgeable complimented the skipper on his smooth go-around.
His answer was useful, and it's what I abide by.
Don't tell them anything they don't need to know if it's something they can't do anything about it.
In other words, just be vague, if anything, and let it be. There's nothing they can do so worrying them unnecessarily doesn't help.
If someone asks, just say something to the point "Overall, we just didn't like the way things were coming together. There was never any real danger, but we decided that it was probably just safer to come around and make sure things were a little more perfect. Safety first."
Blame it on that oh-so-pilot 'gut feeling' that something wasn't quite right and you decided to err on the side of safety. I had a Captain do that once on an ILS in IMC. All the data looked right- the numbers looked right, but he was slightly above glideslope, and for some reason, things just seemed to be taking forever.
Rather than assume we hadn't made a mistake, he just executed a missed approach. What did he tell the pax?
"Things just weren't as perfect as they could have been. My gut was telling me that wasn't good enough, so we came around and did it again."
Passengers thanked us on the way off the plane. Some of the more aviation knowledgeable complimented the skipper on his smooth go-around.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Same here. I got this beat into me working theme park rides. Go into too much detail, and they suddenly think the ride is unsafe, and they're gonna die on a roller coaster. Now, if they start asking specific questions, I'm not going to lie.
Ash Williams
Well-Known Member
Awesome!
Boxes don't bitch................... OOSTK!
Joe28
New Member
haha this is a funny thread. reminds me of more than 1 occasion working approach where a certain airline flying 67's is always too high on approach.. sometimes the problem is the center dumps them on us 20 miles or less from the airport at 10,000. anyways, this 67 comes over to us at 10,000 at 20 miles, i know he will need a vector for the descent. so i ask, he agrees, of course. 15 miles through extended final and he's still doing 280 kts GS (i'm sure he was at 250 kias) and around 9,000. i'm not a jet pilot but i am a pilot too and i was thinking, "slow up that plane captain." 
he needed to be vectored through the final for a 2nd time. ended up getting him set up for the visual 3000 AGL, straight in, 10 miles out and he touches down 4,000 ft past the threshold on a 10,000 ft runway. way to go captain!
... this was still nothing compared to seeing airliners shoot a backcourse to minimums.. that reverse sensing will getcha!
he needed to be vectored through the final for a 2nd time. ended up getting him set up for the visual 3000 AGL, straight in, 10 miles out and he touches down 4,000 ft past the threshold on a 10,000 ft runway. way to go captain! ... this was still nothing compared to seeing airliners shoot a backcourse to minimums.. that reverse sensing will getcha!
haha this is a funny thread. reminds me of more than 1 occasion working approach where a certain airline flying 67's is always too high on approach.. sometimes the problem is the center dumps them on us 20 miles or less from the airport at 10,000. anyways, this 67 comes over to us at 10,000 at 20 miles, i know he will need a vector for the descent. so i ask, he agrees, of course. 15 miles through extended final and he's still doing 280 kts GS (i'm sure he was at 250 kias) and around 9,000. i'm not a jet pilot but i am a pilot too and i was thinking, "slow up that plane captain."
... this was still nothing compared to seeing airliners shoot a backcourse to minimums.. that reverse sensing will getcha!
In 6 years of airline flying I've done 1 B/C approach and that was in barely IFR conditions.... forgive us a little if we gum one up every now and then! We're not instrument students anymore doing multiple partial panel Loc/BC to fixed card NDB holds at 90 kts indicated!!!!!
Joe28
New Member
hahaha for sure man, i believe ya... a couple have had me stand next to the crash phone... scared the crap outta me.
Bumblebee
Commodore
I had a captain forget to hit the b/c mode on the FCP when I was a relatively new FO as we did a back course into MFR...in IMC during the first step down descent, the aircraft started a u turn! I said to the captain..."Backcourse" he said "roger... "I said you need to hit the back course... (Plane now turning through 45 degrees off loc) he said "I know" as aircraft continues turning and I see loc heading towards full deflection I said "A/P OFF IMMEDIATE RIGHT TURN" he woke up and acted and just avoided full deflection...approach asked how we were doing and we replied "correcting"...it was scary for me as well.
flyeagle111
CFO
I've experienced one go around as a passenger (on pinnacle) and the announcement was "truck on the runway, so we had to go around"
Who knows if there was actually a truck on the runway
Who knows if there was actually a truck on the runway
WalterSobchak
Well-Known Member
Just thought I'd ask the 121 crowd. When you're too high and/or too fast on final and you make a precautionary decision to go around (not in an emergency situation), what do you say to the pax? I would assume very few of you say "I messed up." Would you perhaps cop to "we were too high/fast on the approach"? I'm guessing no. So what do you say to the folks in back as to why we're not landing even though it seemed like we were just about to hit the runway? Are there company policies about what to say?
I would think some viable options would be: (1) blame ATC, (2) blame preceding traffic for not vacating the runway quickly enough, (3) blame a sudden, mysterious gust of wind, or (4) tell everyone you thought they'd enjoy a complimentary sightseeing flight over the city.
I wouldn't make one. Below 10K you should be sterile. Cockpit duties only. People don't abide by it as they should. Fly the plane. Worry about your job and get every one on the ground. If I wanted to do play by play I would have went into broadcasting or done vfr volcano tours in Hawaii.
Parked at the gate....Yeah ATC advised us to go around there was a ...(insert noun)..... on the runway way.
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
Making PAs, or at least letting the FA know, is part of your cockpit duties IMO. This is why PA's while taxiing isn't breaking the sterile rule. If you can be expected to call the FA when you have an engine fire below 10K, I think letting him/her know about a go-around, if you have time, is not unwarranted.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Same here. The key there being "if you have time." Technically, you're sterile taxiing as well, but how crews do a quick "We're #X for takeoff, flight attendants please prepare for departure" PA? It's required per our procedures, and so is the notification in the event of a go around. Might as well kill two birds with one stone and let the pax know as well.
drummerboy
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised at the number of you that would lie or give way to much information in a situation like this. PA's are pretty simple be honest but don't give away to much information that will make people nervous. Chances are they won't understand half the things you try to say anyways.
Something as simple as for safetly reasons we decided to try another approach is all you need.
Something as simple as for safetly reasons we decided to try another approach is all you need.
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
On your first day of IOE if asked by a passenger how long you've been flying these jets would you say "This is my first day!!" ?
ppragman
No pasa nada.
Yep. Its funnier that way.
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
"Folks we'll be landing in 4 minutes. Flights attendants prepare for arrival."
Precisely. No need to get all PA-happy about it. If they really want to know why you went around, they can ask when you're on the ground.