Anyone ever experience a "Missed Approach" on an airplane?

I’ve had to go around twice in a row while trying to get into Ft Lauderdale. It was due to an over-aggressive tower controller. There were thunderstorms in the area, and traffic was delayed into and out of the airport. In order to get things back on schedule the tower controller was cutting things extremely tight. What happened was the controller cleared another aircraft for takeoff while we were on short final. Both times the crews taking off were not quite fast enough and were still on the runway when I reached about 100 feet, and both times I had to go-around. On the third approach I gently reminded the controller that this was our third approach, and no one was cleared for takeoff in front of us.

This is extremely rare, however. That day the controller just got overwhelmed and was trying to get as many airplanes in and out of the airport as possible.

And…

I’ve had to divert a couple of times because of a medical emergency. Both times we ran like hell to the nearest airport (which was Las Vegas in both cases). When we declare an emergency for whatever reason the airport will roll all of the CFR (Crash/Fire/Rescue) equipment. It’s a standard procedure to make sure that all the bases are covered.

Once again, it’s better to make a PA telling the passengers that fire trucks will be waiting for us, but it’s not required. The important thing is that we said the “emergency” word (even if it was for a sick passenger) and the airport responds.

I find it very ironic that some of the very things done to safeguard the safety and well-being of aircraft passengers so often winds up scaring the crap out of them.

I’ve ridden out a number of go-arounds in commercial jets, and done my fair share of them in small airplanes.

In the small airplanes, with non-pilot passengers, I tell them of the possibility (among a few other things) even before we take off, usually phrasing it as something like “When we come in for a landing, if things aren’t exactly right in the last couple hundred feet I might choose to go back up and come around again, rather than take an unnecessary risk. If we do that, it’s not that something is wrong, I’m just doing my best to avoid trouble”. Then again, they’re usually sitting right next to me so if something does happen - deer on the runway, someone pulling onto the runway in front of us, whatever - they can see what’s happening and don’t really require an explantion.

I think the most “violent” go around (which was violent at all to my perception, but many of my fellow passengers disagreed) was going into Midway airport in Chicago about six years ago now. We were coming in for what seemed to be a very routine landing. The man in the seat next me stated as how happy he’d be to be on the ground again. Right then, as if on cue, the engines spool up and all the frou-frou on the wings (spoilers, slats, slits, flaps, winkerdoodles, etc.) start moving around again, and a glance out the window showed stuff retracting into the wing. I said we weren’t landing just yet, we’d be going back up, making a big circle, and coming back. My seat mate was basically telling me I was nuts when the airplane did one of the abrupt changes of direction, people yelped and squealed, and I tried very hard not to have a smug “I told you so” smile on my face.

From my viewpoint, the manuver wasn’t extreme at all - very smooth, in fact. And sure enough, once we were up and leveled off again one of the pilots came on the PA, explained a construction truck had pulled out onto the runway in front of us and we’d be landing just as soon as we circled around and lined up on the runway again.

Well, the gentleman sitting next to me was looking at me sort of peculiar, as if the cute little lady next to him has spoken of being Kareen Abdul Jabar prior “the operation”. And he asked me how I knew what was going to happen. I said that I was a pilot and recognized some of the stuff the pilot was doing as the start of a go-around before the non-pilots became aware of the manuver.

“You — you don’t look like a pilot —”

(Yes, I get that a lot. For some reason.)

Anyhow, I’ve no doubt that some of my fellow passengers thought what happened to be quite frightening, but really it was pretty tame compared to some of the things I did to myself in training. It’s just that the average passenger is exepecting to be upright and level as much as possible with no abrupt changes of any sort. The average person also doesn’t have any idea of what airplanes are really capable of (and capable of withstanding), or what’s safe and what isn’t. Same thing for the emergency descents - oh, yeah, they’re LOTS faster that the norm, but they’re not unsafe, just different.

Doing a go-around is equivalent to swerving your car to avoid an obstacle. In some cases, it’s pretty much a non-event (like altering course so you don’t re-run over the dunk skunk in the road) and in others it’s a hair-raising accident-avoidance thing, and mostly it’s somewhere in between.

As for the fire-trucks and what not - one little “Mayday” over the radio brings out the calvary. Yeah, the first time it looks scary, but now I find it reassuring that if I feel a need to yell for help someone really will show up and do all they can to render asssitance. Sometimes more folks than you really need, but having spoken to those guys they’d rather show up a hundred times and not be needed than fail to show up the one time they are needed.

Commerical airliner, Chicago to Baltimore once.

Real low fog. We came in like we were landing then he put the nose up and gunned it.

My wife was like, “what was that?”

And I said, (as if I knew) “That was a guy not happy with his approach.”

It was a little unnerving. We tried it again, and I thought it was at a much shallower angle, so he could pick up the runway easier.

Getting off the plane, I said to the pilot , “didn’t like the first one, huh?”

and he said something like, “the fog was lower than they had reported.”

Unnerving? Yes. Totally frightening? Not really, but if you had a fear of flying I think it could have flipped you out. There’s NO mistaking what’s going on.

I got a question for you, wanderer. . .

So, we’re descending at some rate and we’re at some altitude off the ground.

There’s something you don’t like and you go, “whoa, I better pull a missed approach.”

Well, you know better than I it’s not a video game. You don’t just yank on the stick and we instantly start climbing.

So, I guess the question is: what are the “mechanics” of it? Is there a point of no return that you can’t do it below, or is it a calculation of current speed, current altitude and current rate of descent.

Just out of interest, just how many “feet per second” (or feet per minute, or whatever) are we dropping coming into an airport?

You ever been below that point of no return, and thought, “man, I wish I pulled a missed approach.”

Do Pilots get into slumps where they’ll have several MAs in a row or something?

I think part of the challenge for passengers is the terminology. “Missed approach” carries connotations of error, like a missed field goal or missed deadline. The term might beter be called an “aborted approach.” But Missed Approach it is and wer’re stuck with it.

I remember a miss I made a few years ago when a low overcast was sliding rapidly over the field and the weather went from clear to low IFR in a few minutes. The airplane 2 in front of me landed no sweat, the guy just in front went around and so did I. At that point ATC woke up to our complaints and decided that sending more airplanes down that approach would just be a waste of time & effort.

It was flown perfectly, if I do say so myself. Even my Flight Engineer commented on how text-book & smooth it was, and those guys are tough to impress. Back on downwind I make the obligatory PA, and we landed uneventfully out of a different approach to a different runway with lower weather limits.

As the pax are deplaning & I’m standing in the door saying g-buy, one guy gets hostile and says I shuould have to pay for the fuel & his time for missing that approach. He knew I had screwed up somehow; after all, we hadn’t landed. I debated having a friendly eductional chat with him, but his attitude would’ve made it futile, so I just kept saying g-buy as he stormed up the jetway.

People. Whaddaya gonna do wit em?

Happened to me three times in the same landing.

Had been in the air for more than 24 hours. Bangkok => Hong Kong => Dubai => Paris => Manchester => Dublin. A long long damn journey and I was none too cheerful, but glad finally to be getting home. I noticed it was a bit foggy over Dublin.

Then 50 feet above the runway, up we come like a rocket. Round again, ten feet above the ground, up we come again. And again. All with no explanation. And then, with no explanation, suddenly I can see the Wicklow Mountains, then a load of peat bogs and fields, and finally, after twenty-five minutes, the pilot comes on the intercom and says “We’re heading to Cork because each time we tried to land, ATC informed us that our safe fog threshold had just been exceeded.”

Epilogue:

We landed in Cork, and I noticed Jack Charlton was in business class, and got straight onto the apron and charter a private jet, lucky git. Didn’t even offer me a lift. :wink:

There were about 20 planes grounded at Cork, only one of which could land in that thickness of fog. After three hours sitting in the baggage reclaim area, we were offered a minibus all the way back to Dublin (four hours’ drive at the best of times). Lack of sleep got the better of me and I exploded on the poor ticketing agent, and suddenly they “found” two spaces for us in the larger plane. We were tucked up in bed two hours later.

Trunk,

The simplified de-jargonized version is this: every approach has at least 2 decision points along the way, where you make an explicit evaluation of 1) Am I really where I think I am left-right, up-down & along the path? 2) Am I at the right speed, gear up/down, flaps set, etc? for this point in the procedure? 3) Is the weather reported adequate for the published limitations of the procedure? 4) Where’re the other airplanes ahead, behind and alongside me, how’s their spacing and closure rate, and is the runway itself clear of airplanes, vehicles, animals and excessive rain/snow?

At the end, there’s a fixed point wherein you have to be able to see to land. If you get to that point and can’t see the runway through the clouds, you go around. Very binary. Is the guy ahead, either landing or taking off, is still on the runway? If so, go around. Again, very binary.

The go-around itself has a complete procedure as well. The immediate steps are add power & pull the nose up to get away from the ground. After a few seconds, pull up grear & some flaps, and then begin manuevering away from obstacles, other airplanes, and eventually back towards the runway for another try. The specific missed approach manuevers vary by airport and runway, as do the specific approach routes and altitudes.
The typical bad weather approach has a final decison point at 200’ above the ground, which occurs when the airplane is almost over the ramped lights which are upstream of the end of the runway. In a jet, we’re descending at about 800 feet per minute, so that’s 15 seconds before arriving at ground level. Given that we normally start to round-out for touchdown at 50-ish feet (depending on the specific airplane), we’re 10-ish seconds from needing to start the landing manuever.

Some approaches to some runways have higher decision limits, with 500 feet being typical. That’s usually caused by obstacles or terrain in the area, or for small airports, lack of budget to install better electronics to provide the accurate guidance needed for lower approaches.

Converesely, there are approachs with 100’ decision points which require more equipment redundancy on the plane and on the ground, professional crews only, fancy autopilots, etc., etc. With a 100’ decision, it’s not uncommon for the wheels to brush the ground on a missed approach initiated at the final decision point.

Finally, there are full autoland approaches where you don’t have to see the ground at all until the computer lands the plane. The equipment & training requirements are even more stringent, so these facilities are only found at places famous for foggy weather, such as Seattle & London. The airplane can land & brake itself to a stop on the centerline of the runway. It’s then our job to somehow pick our way through the fog to the terminal. That’s exciting the first few times you do it.
Why do missed approaces occur?

Missing an approach due to being off course is extremely rare, a once in a career event (ignoring student pilots of course). Missing due to getting too close to the aircraft in front is an all-too-frequent occurrence in the ever more crowded runways of the major airplorts. (Nervous fliers note that “too close” means less than a mile away.) Missing due to weather happens some, like my previous post. About 1-2x per pilot per year.

From ATC’s perspective, the only way to know for sure the weather’s become too bad is to try it a couple of times. After a couple of airplanes miss, then ATC comes up with plan B. In rapidly changing conditions, typically a snowstorm, you could go for an hour with every other airplane landing or missing, just depending on the density of snow at the decision point at the moment an airplane gets there.

At other times there’s a stable situation with thick fog and everyone knows there’s no point in trying; the weather instruments tell the tale well enough.

very interesting, LSL. Thanks.

So maybe that’s what happened in St. Louis. Descending, descending, descending, geez, it’s cloudy out, descending, not descending, climbing, climbing, climbing.

It was weird. I saw a light outta my window, so we were close to the ground. However, I don’t really remember circling - my initial thought was that the pilot had misjudged the airport somehow. And we didn’t get an explanation, either, tho’ I really would’ve appreciated one.

It was a commercial flight (TWA?), but a smaller one.

Sure, I can dig, but I’m not the sort prone to panicky over-reactions. I saw everything out there and thought, “Well, I guess they’re not taking any chances.”

But a lot of people on my side of the plane flipped out when they saw all the crash wagons because, up to this point, they were ready to accept all of these gyrations as necessary to get a sick man onto the ground. The moment they saw all the hardware and blinking lights, they automatically assumed that it was really for us. The chorus of ,“Oh My Gods,” and “We’re Gonna Dies” were ringing out in two-part harmony, even joined by people on the other side of the plane who couldn’t see what was going on, but were ready and willing to embrace the panic of the starboard-side passengers.

And several people were balling out the flight crew when we deplaned in Atlanta, just as LSLGuy described above; I thought it was grossly unfair, and as I passed the Captain I shook his hand and said “Thanks for the wild ride, let’s do it again sometime!”

Don’t flight crews really refer to the passengers as “sheep,” or “sheeples?”

I’ve heard the term “self-loading cargo”.

I had a landing attended by all the emergency vehicles at Manchester, England on a flight from Atlanta. There was no statement beforehand that it would happen, but I didn’t hear even a single concerned murmur from the passengers. Maybe the plane was full of phlegmatic Brits.

Afterwards, the pilot explained that we had jumped the queue to land because a diversion from foggy Gatwick had left us with insufficient fuel to take our turn. This was technically an “emergency” and it was therefore SOP to have the emergency vehicles on standby.

It did make me regret flying Delta because BA planes have the capability of landing in fog through some automated system, as mentioned in an earlier post.

Haven’t read the whole thread, but I wanted to reply to this. Gen. Wm. J. Fox Airport (WJF) in Lancaster, California. I’m on final when the tower broadcasts, ‘Attention all aircraft. Coyote traffic on the runway.’ (I didn’t see the coyote.)

Again, I haven’t read the thread; so this may have been mentioned already. A ‘missed approach’ is a specific thing related to an instrument landing. A ‘go-round’ is a balked landing. IAN-IFR-rated, but a ‘missed approach’ as I understand it happens when you are unable to complete your landing because of visibility/weather. A go-round happens for a variety of reasons from traffic/obstructions on the runway to simply not being in a good position for a landing. All pilots have had their share of go-rounds.

Since flying has become less expensive I’ve heard the term “Clampetts”.

Actually, it doesn’t really depend on the air carrier but the airplane itself. Delta flies airplanes that are perfectly capable of landing in Cat III conditions, just as BA does. It probably had more to do with fuel and the amount of holding time available, but that’s just speculation on my part.

And FWIW, I never refer to passengers as “sheep”. They pay my salary, after all! For the most part passengers are cordial, friendly and a joy to fly to their destination. But every once in a while you get that one person that makes you lower your opinion of the entire human race. When I encounter them I say “buh-bye” and then think how difficult it must be to go through life so angry. Better them than me!

I thought a “missed approach” was missing your IFR approach for any reason - yes, usually visibility/weather but being warned off due to an obstruction on the field or traffic conflict would also apply. If you’re on an IFR approach, regardless of weather conditions (and the airliners are always using instrument procedures, correct?), if you abort the landing for any reason you’re still supposed to use the missed approach climb-out, right?

So a go-around may not be a missed approach, but a missed approach results in a go-around, would the rest of you pilots agree?

Anyhow - from the point of view of a passenger in the back of the tin can there isn’t much, if any, difference, is there?

Heck, no - I’ve had to dodge not only dogs but deer, geese, and kids in go-carts.

Gary Regional Airport ATIS (that’s automated traffic information system to you ground lovers) always warns of “migratory bird, deer, and coyote activity on and around the airfield”

About every two years we have someone at my airport total an airplane by hitting a deer either on take-off or landing, and you know, it doesn’t do much for the deer, either. (Propellors, apparently, can spray deer parts up to a quarter mile with ease)

And last year we had a bat-strike. You see, the runway lights were on, it being night, which attracted bugs, which attracted bats, one of which did not get out of the Really Big Flying Thing in time. Ick. That was messy, too.

If you think a go-around is exciting try actually hitting something with an airplane…

Huh. Not sure “aborted” is really that much better, given how close it is to “abortion” and the baggage that goes with that.

Don’t know what else we could use, though - “discontinued” approach? Maybe that’s why I like “go-around” - not entirely accurate from a technical jargon viewpoint, but for the lay public, who aren’t famillar with and often aren’t interested in the technical stuff, it seems to cause less anxiety. It also describes more or less what happens from their viewpoint - we’re going to go up and around and circle back to the runway again. We’re going around. It’s a go-around.

We had one of those not too long ago here on the Dope, saying something like “obviously a competant pilot always lands on the first try”, but I couldn’t find the thread. Darn. It had some pretty good rants in it - it was in the Pit.

Never had a missed approach as part of my collection of “interesting but generally not scary things that occured when trying to get from one place to another by plane”, but I once landed at JFK returning from Israel in such severe foggy weather that they almost diverted us to another airport. As it was, I saw the runway lights and felt the boom of the wheels hitting the ground almost immediately. Kinda neat, but boy was I relieved we were safely on the ground and at the planned airport. Most of the relief was due to not having to figure out how to get me, my luggage, and my parents (who were picking me up) to the same location.
Ducks, geese, even deer on the other hand sound tame to me. I’ve had to “help” chase giraffes and keep an elephant off the runway. I was in Botswana, the runway was a level grass strip with no trees, the planes that landed there had room for only six people and the pilots would choose who sat where based on balancing the plane. Routine for them, a little scary for tourist me. Helping chase animals off the runway meant holding tight as the driver drove near the animals. Giraffes (at least these giraffes) are not notably scared of humans in vehicles, but we were pesky enough for them to saunter off the airstrip so the pilot could land.

Earlier on that same trip to Africa, a larger (but not really large, say 50 passanger) airplane had landed abruptly due to engine trouble. This was mostly a nuisance, not least due to restrictions on flying after dark, because we didn’t get where we were going until the next day. The only people who became seriously concerned about safety were those who could hear the engine trouble before the pilot announced the new destination. The next day, the plane bringing spare parts had trouble landing due to a low cloud ceiling. That evening, the plane we were supposed to fly our next leg on landed on a runway and popped a tire on debris and was back to needing someone to fly in a spare part.
Frustrating, especially for the members of the tour who didn’t stick around for the extension. The extension being where we were with the grass runway and the giraffe farewell committee.

As I said, I’m not IFR rated; but my impression is that a missed approach is due to viz problems, and a go-round is for another reason.

[This page* discusses missed approaches. It talks about MDA and visibility.

On the other hand, [url=“http://gps.faa.gov/gpsbasics/missed-text.htm”]this page](The Missed Approach - AVweb) says:

So you may be right; I’ve just never heard ‘missed approach’ used for anything else but an instrument landing attempt.