Re: 767 at LAX did a go-around today!

[Bob Gardner]

The mark of a good pilot(s). The passengers might expect every approach to
terminate in a landing, but no pilot should have that expectation.

Bob Gardner

"Yossarian" > wrote in message
et...
> I was listening to the LAX tower (south runways) on my handheld today at
> about 3:40pm and was surprised to hear American 297 heavy call "going
> around" while on short final. I followed along as the pilot reported a
> slats problem. Tower headed him to LAX VORTAC then outbound 235 at 2000'.
> Two SoCal approach controllers took him in turn, asking if he needed
> assistance but apparently they worked everything out and landed safely 10
> minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a
heavy
> jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!
>
>
>

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
>minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a heavy
>jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!

I've been on a heavy that did a go-around. The pilot said that another
plane blundered onto the runway.


--
Paul Tomblin >, not speaking for anybody
Once we've got the bugs ironed out, we'll be running on flat bugs

[Joachim Feise]

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
>
>>minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a heavy
>>jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!
>
>
> I've been on a heavy that did a go-around. The pilot said that another
> plane blundered onto the runway.

The same here, with the same announcement on the intercom.
However, since I'm always observing the approaches, I noticed shortly before
the pilot did the go-around that he was way too high. From my window seat,
I couldn't see if there was another plane on the runway, but I doubt it.

-Joe

[John Gaquin]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message news:bi17s3!
>
> ... The pilot said that another
> plane blundered onto the runway.
>

That has been known to happen from time to time, and was probably the case.
But, the old "...other plane on the runway..." story has also been used to
cover a few bad approaches over the years. :-)

JG

[Jeff Franks]

Yep. Friend of mine is a AA pilot and told me that they had to land once
without flaps. Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were for
that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
you). They were a bit close, so they went around and announced that another
plane had come out on the runway.

Kinda irked me because it gives the non-flying public the impression that
ATC/GA/Another pilot had put them at risk, when this was not the case. Why
lie? Just tell the passengers whats happening and get on with it.

[Yossarian]

Come on, that's easy. Most people will be freaked out enough that they
aren't landing on the first try, without having to believe it's a problem
with their own plane.

"Jeff Franks" > wrote in message
...
> Yep. Friend of mine is a AA pilot and told me that they had to land once
> without flaps. Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were
for
> that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
> you). They were a bit close, so they went around and announced that
another
> plane had come out on the runway.
>
> Kinda irked me because it gives the non-flying public the impression that
> ATC/GA/Another pilot had put them at risk, when this was not the case.
Why
> lie? Just tell the passengers whats happening and get on with it.
>
>

[Jeff Franks]

Bull. Don't lie to me. Even if I know nothing about whats going on.
Explain it to me in a way that I'll understand that "hey this isn't a big
deal, we'll just land on a longer runway while going a little faster than
normal". I'd rather see that than to be told that the whole friggen system
is at fault and some "small plane" (that was the term they used) had just
screwed up. Not for me.


"Yossarian" > wrote in message
et...
> Come on, that's easy. Most people will be freaked out enough that they
> aren't landing on the first try, without having to believe it's a problem
> with their own plane.
>
> "Jeff Franks" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Yep. Friend of mine is a AA pilot and told me that they had to land
once
> > without flaps. Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were
> for
> > that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
> > you). They were a bit close, so they went around and announced that
> another
> > plane had come out on the runway.
> >
> > Kinda irked me because it gives the non-flying public the impression
that
> > ATC/GA/Another pilot had put them at risk, when this was not the case.
> Why
> > lie? Just tell the passengers whats happening and get on with it.
> >
> >
>
>

[John Harlow]

> Yep. Friend of mine is a AA pilot and told me that they had to land once
> without flaps. Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were
for
> that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
> you). They were a bit close, so they went around and announced that
another
> plane had come out on the runway.
>
> Kinda irked me because it gives the non-flying public the impression that
> ATC/GA/Another pilot had put them at risk, when this was not the case.
Why
> lie? Just tell the passengers whats happening and get on with it.

I wonder what compels them to get on the horn and say something about it in
the first place. Just fly the damn plane.

[John Gaquin]

"Jeff Franks" > wrote in message

> ....Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were for
> that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
> you).

That's normal. That's the safest way to do it. There's no point in
committing details of abnormal procedures to memory -- plenty of time to
look them up. And you don't "..dig out the books..". There are convenient
checklists all prepared that cover virtually all eventualities. There are a
few emergency procedures that you do memorize -- immediate action items
only.

Regards,

John Gaquin
B727, B747

[John Gaquin]

"Jeff Franks" > wrote in message
>
> Kinda irked me because it gives the non-flying public the impression that
> ATC/GA/Another pilot had put them at risk, when this was not the case.
Why
> lie? Just tell the passengers whats happening and get on with it.

It's a careful balancing act. Some people watch the progress of the flight
out the window, and have some familiarity. But not many. Most people
haven't got a clue what makes an airplane tick, and if you tell them
somethings not absolutely 100% normal, they'll get upset. You could wind up
causing more problems than you already have. Generally speaking, if you're
dealing with an abnormal, glossing over it is acceptable -- it really is no
big deal. If you have a bona fide emergency, you play straight and right up
front.

--
Regards,

John Gaquin
B727, B747

[Corrie]

Joachim Feise > wrote in message >...
> Paul Tomblin wrote:
>
> > In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
> >
> >>minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a heavy
> >>jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!

On a 737 making a bad approach to the "alternate" MSP runway one night
- high, fast, too-tight base-to final turn ... I was *real* glad he
didn't try to salvage it. No announcement over the interconm, though.

Somewhat related, several years ago I watched a United 737 land at
SLC, taxi back, and take off again. Wrong airport? Weird to see it.

[Steve House]

Saw it at an airshow in Salt Lake City about 10 years ago. 747 was on final
to 17 and heard a Cessna receive a taxi clearance to the same runway.
Instead of holding, guy taxis right over the hold line, lines up, and
started his takeoff roll with that 747 almost right on top of him. Was
holding my breath because for a few moments it looked like he was going to
climb right up into the belly of the jet. '47 gets it cleaned up and climbs
back out headed 45 degrees off to the right, while the Cessna just bops off
on his way climbing straight out, apparently unaware that the jet had even
been there. The tower did NOT sound happy.

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
> >minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a
heavy
> >jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!
>
> I've been on a heavy that did a go-around. The pilot said that another
> plane blundered onto the runway.
>
>
> --
> Paul Tomblin >, not speaking for anybody
> Once we've got the bugs ironed out, we'll be running on flat bugs

[Craig]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote in message >...

>
> I've been on a heavy that did a go-around. The pilot said that another
> plane blundered onto the runway.

We had to do one in a DC-10 in Las Vegas a bunch of years ago. I was
watching out the window and we kept floating down the runway. Just as
we passed the halfway point on that runway, the pilot went to max
power. We went screaming off the airport boundry at about 150'AGL and
well over 200kts. Wheeled around and landed on another runway. Never
did climb above 500' in the turn. The captain's explanation was the
sudden wind shift of more than 90 degrees and it raising up to 30kts
continous. I still remember the dust clouds we set rolling through a
subdivision as we roared over it.

Craig C.

[Tom S.]

"Corrie" > wrote in message
om...
> Joachim Feise > wrote in message
>...
> > Paul Tomblin wrote:
> >
> > > In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
> > >
> > >>minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a
heavy
> > >>jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!
>
> On a 737 making a bad approach to the "alternate" MSP runway one night
> - high, fast, too-tight base-to final turn ... I was *real* glad he
> didn't try to salvage it. No announcement over the interconm, though.
>
> Somewhat related, several years ago I watched a United 737 land at
> SLC, taxi back, and take off again. Wrong airport? Weird to see it.

Along the same lines, a few years back I was on an AmericaWest flight into
Long Beach (LGB). I couldn't see the ground from my window, but when I did
we were almost at touch down...I thought.

When we touched, the pilot hit the brakes hard and didn't even deploy the
reversers. Almost immediately, he made a hard left turn onto the taxiway.
Being on the right hand side, I looked out and saw...the THRESHOLD LIGHTS
for the opposite end of the runway just outside my window. As near as I can
recall, he made the last taxiway for turning off the runway.

Tom
--
"Transported to a surreal landscape, a young
girl kills the first woman she meets and then
teams up with three complete strangers to kill again."
--Marin County newspaper's TV listing for "The Wizard of Oz"

[Frederick Wilson]

When I was flying out of Fort Bliss, it was not uncommon to have heavy's
shot approaches to Biggs Army Airfield only to go around and then land at El
Paso. The approach ends of both runways are only a mile apart. I do no of
one Delta flight that landed and had to turn around and take off again. I
also know of at least 4 C-130's that have landed at El Paso only to have to
take off again to come to Biggs. The problem here? Two differnet towers.

Fred


"Corrie" > wrote in message
om...
> Joachim Feise > wrote in message
>...
> > Paul Tomblin wrote:
> >
> > > In a previous article, "Yossarian" > said:
> > >
> > >>minutes later. Pretty minor I guess but I've never seen or heard of a
heavy
> > >>jet doing a go around. Must have freaked some of the passengers out!
>
> On a 737 making a bad approach to the "alternate" MSP runway one night
> - high, fast, too-tight base-to final turn ... I was *real* glad he
> didn't try to salvage it. No announcement over the interconm, though.
>
> Somewhat related, several years ago I watched a United 737 land at
> SLC, taxi back, and take off again. Wrong airport? Weird to see it.

[Mike Beede]

In article >, Jeff Franks > wrote:

> Friend of mine is a AA pilot and told me that they had to land once
> without flaps. Trouble was that none of them knew what the speeds were for
> that setup, so they had to dig out the books ("professional" pilots mind
> you).

I'd be willing to bet that the landing speeds vary over a wide range
depending on gross weight of the aircraft. They probably have to
check a table every time they take off or land to see what the reference
speed is. I think if your "friend" is reading the thread, you owe him
an "apology."

Regards,

Mike Beede