[Flightlevel]

Crosswinds and turbulence increase the chance of a go around because landings are at higher speed to allow for sudden drops in windspeed and large aircraft have difficulty reducing speed before landing causing a too late touchdown so an overshoot. ATC & ground conflicts cause go arounds too.
The good news is the following landing has a 60% better chance! The bad news: second chance is all you get before a diversion!

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=762641]Crosswinds and turbulence increase the chance of a go around because landings are at higher speed to allow for sudden drops in windspeed and large aircraft have difficulty reducing speed before landing causing a too late touchdown so an overshoot. ATC & ground conflicts cause go arounds too.
The good news is the following landing has a 60% better chance! The bad news: second chance is all you get before a diversion!

[/quote]

Why would a cross wind mandate a higher approach speed? (clue – it may require an amended approach technique such as wing down or crab) Why does turb mandate a higher approach speed? You risk messing up your landing performance data. You ma take wind/gust values into account, but turb?

Larger aircraft have more momentum, but they fly a stabilised approach, so they should not have difficulty reducing speed, as they are approaching at the right speed for the conditions. Airline pilots are consumate pros.

60% better chance? – please explain why and also explain why you only get one more approach?

[Flightlevel]

Talk to a pilot, thats all facts and statistics and Rules of the Air, not imagination!

[Cloud-9]

Just one in 30 plus years. On CX and about 60 feet above the ground at KUL, we experienced an upwards surge and the friendly Australian pilot told us that an MH plane had not cleared the runway.

Within 30 minutes we had landed safely, and said pilot was stood at the door to wish everybody a safe and happy onward journey. A nice touch

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=762663]Talk to a pilot, thats all facts and statistics and Rules of the Air, not imagination!

[/quote]

I’ve had a pilots licence for over 20 years and you don’t understand what you are saying.

[Tom Otley]

It can be upsetting if people aren’t used to flying.

The first time was on a Sunday evening flight back from Budapest into London Heathrow with Malev. (Must be 10+ years ago).
It was windy and we’d been holding for a while, being bumped around. Then when we were coming in there was that feeling of suddenly approaching sideways (not actually, but certainly not as straight as normal) and then we were up again, though so close the wheels can’t have been far from the runway. People were crying around me.
As I remember it, there weren’t any announcements either, although I know pilots say that talking to passengers is pretty much last on the lost of priorities. – “Aviate, Navigate, Communicate”

The Emirates crash was a TOGA gone wrong, wasn’t it?

Emirates crash lands at Dubai International

[Flightlevel]

Too early to read the final report though a decision to go around was made too late and there may have been “get home itus” the reason only two approaches are allowed before a diversion. The momentum of a heavy airliner travelling at additional speed to prevent a stall if wind drops can cause a late landing because aircraft keep flying, not descending if at a higher speed, and ground effect can increase the landing. I experienced a 747 overshoot at HKG last year after a turbulent approach, its funny since the pax go quiet even though statistically the second landing is safer!

[LuganoPirate]

[quote quote=762678]Just one in 30 plus years. On CX and about 60 feet above the ground at KUL, we experienced an upwards surge and the friendly Australian pilot told us that an MH plane had not cleared the runway.

Within 30 minutes we had landed safely, and said pilot was stood at the door to wish everybody a safe and happy onward journey. A nice touch

[/quote]

Why was this from Cloud-9 reported as “Inappropriate Content”? I can see nothing wrong with it!

[LuganoPirate]

Just remembered another go around. Coming into LCY with Swiss on a very wet and windy morning. It seemed like we were coming in sideways when full power was applied just before the beginning of the runway and round we went rocking and rolling the whole way. We had to wait almost 20 minutes at about 2,000′ though it felt like an eternity as the plane was bouncing all over the place with the wind. Fortunately we made it second time round.

[SimonS1]

One at Gatwick, and one at Nairobi.

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=762756]

Cloud-9 wrote:

Just one in 30 plus years. On CX and about 60 feet above the ground at KUL, we experienced an upwards surge and the friendly Australian pilot told us that an MH plane had not cleared the runway.

Within 30 minutes we had landed safely, and said pilot was stood at the door to wish everybody a safe and happy onward journey. A nice touch

Why was this from Cloud-9 reported as “Inappropriate Content”? I can see nothing wrong with it!

[/quote]

Nowt wrong with the post, but the report is right next to the reply and quote links – I’d guess it is accidental and it seems to happen a bit.

I had one at City, too – it was a gusty day and the 146 (CityJet) floated a little (but enough) in the flare and the pilot opened up the taps. This is the only go around I’ve experienced where the main wheels momentarily touched the runway before the climb out. I saw the captain on leaving the aircraft and asked him if the float was the reason for the G/A and his reply (with a strong French accent) was ‘yes, ze wall at ze end of the runway looked very ‘ard and ze air looked very soft, so I decide to try again’ – top man 🙂

[esselle]

Quite a number over the years, and from memory all related to blocked runways. Never, however, had an aborted take off. Anybody here had that experience?

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=762860]Quite a number over the years, and from memory all related to blocked runways. Never, however, had an aborted take off. Anybody here had that experience?

[/quote]

Two – #1 – a low speed rejected take off, at Copenhagen years ago on a BA737-200 series to London.

As the pilot stood the engines up, he saw an indicated problem and chopped the power. We must have got to 15mph! PUlled on to a taxiway, did a series of hcecks and off we went.

#2 – a low speed rejected take off at Cairo on a MS E190, 4-5 years ago – probably got to about 40/50 mph and it was a gentle deceleration – needed an aircraft change, though.

A high speed reject would be rather more dramatic and I hope never to experience one.

[MartynSinclair]

remember, the take off is the only part of the flight that can not be controlled by the autopilot. The decision to go around, whilst made by the pilot, can be fully controlled by the auto pilot after the pilot has pressed the button.

[Nogbad01]

Two in 20 years. First BA shuttle from MAN into LGW (when such a thing existed), just not stable on the approach in high winds so went round for another go.
second into JFK in BA747. Usual reason of previous aircraft still on the runway. That was fun though as we were almost down.

[Author]

Posts