Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Written Procedures for Go-Arounds at Busy Places

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Written Procedures for Go-Arounds at Busy Places

    This is a tough question- hidden in a ton of discussion.

    Are any of our pilots (controllers?) aware of specific procedures for go arounds at busy airports.

    I'm thinking ATL, DFW type places...you go around, but someone's taking off right underneath you on the "paired" takeoff runway...Seems like there could be a traffic conflict pretty quickly.

    I know that during true IFR/IMC, takeoffs are sequenced around landings so that there are about zero potential conflicts.

    But in visual conditions with planes launching about 30 seconds apart on two runways and with landings happening randomly at three places all around that- are there some rules in play that help deal with the unplanned addition to the traffic flow?

    Do the initial altitudes and headings assigned to the departing guys save a slot for a potential go-around?

    I know that the Mark IV eyeball is a dang good, and probably adequate separation tool, but conversely, airplanes have some pretty impressive blind spots...especially in the department of climbing up underneath someone's nose....and at a place like ATL you can't go too many thousand feet left or right...

    Considering that we have so many other 'extreme proactive' safety procedures, it might be good to have an altitude and heading reserved for the go-around guy so he doesn't mix it up too bad with all the folks departing.

    Conversely- when I read about some of the go-around incidents that have actually occurred at airports operating on "intersecting" runways (Memphis, Newark)...it would appear that those airports- the one's that really need them- don't have them.

    So just to restate- Is anyone aware of some halfway formal procedures (altitudes and headings that are reserved ahead of time) to send go-around traffic away from a big flow of departing traffic in the event of a go-around?

    ...Or is it just a"mundane Oh shit" maintain visual separation, and take a few seconds and figure out what to do with the unexpected plane in the flow of departures?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  • #2
    A missed approach (also referred to as "go-around") is the procedure to be followed if an approach cannot be continued.


    It's spread all over the page but there's also a lot of info on missed approach procedures here: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...m/aim0504.html
    Be alert! America needs more lerts.

    Eric Law

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by elaw View Post
      http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/M...oach_Procedure

      It's spread all over the page but there's also a lot of info on missed approach procedures here: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...m/aim0504.html
      Thank you, but No. This misses the boat.

      Those are missed approach procedures which is for instrument operation where ATC is already assuring separation.

      Although there's overlap, missed approaches and go-arounds are not exactly the same thing.

      Pretend it's severe VMC at DFW/ATL and they're running fast and furious and heard of deer runs across the runway and you go around while someone is lifting off on the adjacent pair runway...The missed approach procedure does not protect you from tangling with the departing guy.

      Under genuine IMC/IFR the tower would not clear the other dude for takeoff on that paired runway until you are not a factor...

      When weather is good- you see arrivals and departures occurring wantonly on those pairs...planes landing and taking off literally right next to each other...

      ...The landing plane has a great visual veiw, but what if he pulls up (nose blocks the view), drifts inward and overtakes the departing plane that is drifting outward...

      ...make sense?
      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yep!

        But... if you're landing at DFW/ATL in VMC you're still going to be following instructions from a control tower, and they would most likely tell you what to do when you say you're going around. Something like "climb to 2,500 & turn to 240 as soon as possible".

        I don't know if those instructions would mimic the IFR missed-approach procedure (or part of it) for the runway you're using, but IMHO it would be sensible for them to... if the same procedure is used for VFR and IFR it would reduce confusion.

        Of course if you were landing at F45 (the airport I used to fly from), you, the departing aircraft, and the deer could all do whatever you want as there's no control tower.
        Be alert! America needs more lerts.

        Eric Law

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 3WE
          Those are missed approach procedures which is for instrument operation where ATC is already assuring separation.
          Although there's overlap, missed approaches and go-arounds are not exactly the same thing.
          How so? Unless instructed otherwise, don't you always adhere to the approach plate procedure regardless of conditions?

          Comment


          • #6
            When flying IFR, yes. Unless of course ATC instructs you to do otherwise.

            If you're flying VFR at a towered airport, you'll have to follow ATC instructions which may or may not match a published procedure... but you're not expected to know the procedure in advance.

            If you're VFR at a non-towered airport, in theory you can do pretty much anything you want. But there are guidelines and customs that are generally adhered to when making an approach.

            That's all in the USA... I have no idea what the rules are elsewhere although I think they're generally similar.
            Be alert! America needs more lerts.

            Eric Law

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Evan View Post
              How so? Unless instructed otherwise, don't you always adhere to the approach plate procedure regardless of conditions?
              @#$%@@!

              Sure...go ahead and blindly follow the procedure Evan, and collide with the plane climbing up underneath you...

              For the third time...during visual conditions, ATC deviates from the "full guaranteed" separations and get's more operations accomplished.

              Please note what happens at Atlanta the next time the visibility or ceiling get's a little low...there will be big delays...

              That's because takeoffs and landings are sequenced (so if someone does go around, they won't be blind and 1000 feet away from a departing plane.)

              So fine, maybe the landing plane begins a missed approach...BUT the question was bigger than that...is the departing plane 'always' given an initial heading or altitude that will diverge from the MAP?...

              Does that make sense?

              And sure...during visual conditions, the pilots use their eyeballs and ATC will say, "maintain visual separation" while they work things out...But Evan, are you sure that "just winging it" like that is good enough for you?

              Shouldn't there be a write up saying "departing planes will be assigned this altitude and this heading to avoid aircraft doing a MAP (and another repeat....during true IMC, this is accomplished by sequencing as much as vectors).
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                How so? Unless instructed otherwise, don't you always adhere to the approach plate procedure regardless of conditions?
                If you are in a visual approach, you are not required to have the approach plate to begin with. If you don't have an instrument certificate, you are not even required to know how to fly a published missed approach.

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #9
                  They've definitely run into this issue in practice several times at JFK



                  I'm not sure exactly where the procedures are written but I think they are standardized and trained for to a certain extent at each control tower.

                  At LAX go arounds are usually told to maintain 2,000 till the controller figures out where to point them and keep them clear of departures.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    If you are in a visual approach, you are not required to have the approach plate to begin with. If you don't have an instrument certificate, you are not even required to know how to fly a published missed approach.
                    Does this apply when flying into airfields serving major airlines?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The rules don't make any distinction between airports that serve major airlines and those that don't.

                      The only difference is that airlines (major or not) usually (but not always) fly in and out of airports with control towers, and the rules differ between towered and non-towered airports.

                      Actually if you want to get really technical, the rule difference isn't related to whether the airport itself has a control tower, but the class of airspace it's located within. Class B, C, and D airspace usually surrounds towered airports, and there are stricter rules for operating in that airspace than for class E which is what usually surrounds non-towered airports.

                      However it's possible for a non-towered airport to be located within the class B, C, or D airspace surrounding a different larger airport. In that case, even though the airport you're operating to/from doesn't have a tower, you have to follow the procedures associated with the airspace it's located within.

                      You can read more here: http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airspace.htm
                      Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                      Eric Law

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Evan View Post
                        Does this apply when flying into airfields serving major airlines?
                        Yes.

                        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hmmmmm... wouldn't the TCAS be of any help if there was a potential conflict between a departing aircraft and the aircraft that missed the approach?

                          3WE, I am also not quite clear on what the difference is between a missed approach and a go-around. I always thought those were just two different terms for the same thing.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            As I understand it a missed approach is where the the approach is abandoned by the crew for a variety of reasons.

                            A go around is the resulting action.

                            A go around initiated by the crew is normally a pre decided published action where the aircraft flies a specific heading at a specific speed to a specified height at a specific place in order to clear the area safely. This gives the crew time to act and advise ATC of their go around and routing intentions and to give ATC time to formulate any further actions required.

                            A go around instructed by ATC for whatever reason will involve one or more crews/aircraft all of which will be under the direct control of ATC from the beginning of the incident.

                            As I say, this is how I understand it to be but I could very easily be wrong.

                            It's worth noting that your average unlicensed GA airfield that has a radio advisory facility (NOTE: Advisory....not Control) cannot give clearances or other instructions to pilots. They can only advise on currently existing conditions so it's the pilots who make the final decision.
                            If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                              Hmmmmm... wouldn't the TCAS be of any help if there was a potential conflict between a departing aircraft and the aircraft that missed the approach?
                              Yes, it can. But that's a last resource. If the TCAS goes off, chances you've already got a loss of separation incident.

                              3WE, I am also not quite clear on what the difference is between a missed approach and a go-around. I always thought those were just two different terms for the same thing.
                              Semantics aside, what 3WE is distinguishing is a published missed approach procedure, which is an integral part of the published instrument approach procedure, from your average VFR go-around, for the reasons he himself explained n times already in this thread.

                              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X