Go-arounds are practised by all crews every 6 months in training. All-engine, one engine out, from precision, from Cat II, from non-precision, with and without HUDs, from circling, low-energy (Vref-10 knots) and just if the instructor wants to see another. They all know how to do them and they don't get the boxes ticked until they do them perfectly.
So eliminating accidents or mistakes (humans tend to do those occasionally), why do we accept a culture where the safest procedure and the overall authority of the PIC is eroded by nimrod management, ground-based yahoos who dumb-down and over-ride the pilot's experience, decision-making and command? Why is there a price to pay for using what we are trained to do and using all our skills to keep the passengers safe? If the company is skating so close to the edge financially, its time for management to donate some of their bonuses to a "GO-AROUND FUND" or just get another job.
Given that we have accepted the way that we are told to operate our aircraft, that is why we should demand safer facilities to operate into and why Toronna needs to have its ass kicked.
High and long landings.
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: High and long landings.
"What's it doing now?"
"Fly low and slow and throttle back in the turns."
"Fly low and slow and throttle back in the turns."
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Re: High and long landings.
Actual landing distance is available in the QRH. There are two sets of figures - one for maximum manual braking and one for autobrake low/medium. These figures can be corrected for tailwind and elevation. Both sets of charts contain wet/contaminated figures.Dog wrote:I don't know about overriding the pilots. But I don't see why there couldn't be a land/don't land calculation for landing much as V1 is for a balanced field takeoff. Might keep the runway available in the minds of the pilots during high workload landings. There is a hesitation to performing a go-around... don't know why, but it's out there.
This can be calculated very early in the flight.
As for hesitation in Performing in a go-around - I won't hesitate to do one. Last year I ended up high and fast on a visual approach. Looked like we'd land about half way down the runway at a very high speed. Made a go-around and second visual approach was normal. Wrote a report as per company requirements and never heard another word about it. In fact I've never heard anything about any go-around I've made at any company I've worked for.
Seems a number of people are not familiar with operating jets:-
Once reverse is selected a go-around is prohibited (both airbus and Boeing).
As for landing with CB's on the go-around track/approach - I fly in South Asia. The Monsoon has just started and this happens frequently at most of the places I fly to. If necessary I'll request a different go-around routing or land on the opposite runway with a tailwind.
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
Re: High and long landings.
Guess I'll be an old fart when my 20 year old starts having kids.MichaelP wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Youngwhat constitutes "young generation?"
Old farts I think

Are we there yet?