Go around at Windhok

[Guest Cantuezel]

Hi,I just saw the landing video of that visual approach at Windhok, Kenia, that was aborted and missed approach performed afterwards (to be seen at the video):http://a330.net/--> Then Multimedia -> Video library-> A340 cockpit -> Landing and then the "Windhoek" approachThe first final approach there was aborted and a missed-approach performed.Could you just give me the reason why the pilot flying descided to perform that missed-approach (the reason to abort the first approach)? The pilots say something technical but I can`t understand what they say/mean and don`t see any "disturbing" traffic on the RWY or other reason for that maneuver etc...I would like to practice that kind of go-around at the PMDG-737-700 myself...:)Many thanks in advance...GreetingsSusan

[Guest Knikolaes]

Alignment. Look VERY VERY closely at the alignment. They were too far left in the first attempt and no amojhnt of "crabbing" would have been safe there.The second attempt they looked much better.It's VERY hard to see this at first, but if you look at the second landing then click the video right back to the first landing you can tell how far off they were with the first attempt. Now the OFFICIAL reason for the go-around may have been different, but that is the only thing I can see in the video that could posibly be it. The "technical" may have been the ILS being off. You could tell they were hand flying it at least the second time.By the way - that is an awesome site. DL'd the other videos. VERY VERY nice addityion to the libraries of any fligth enthusiest. I love the Phoenix one meself. Nice to know I am not the only one that has that issue with my PSS A340 at KPHX using live weather/temps. **laughs**

[Guest Cantuezel]

Hi,thanks for the reason for the Windhok go-around. The problem is that the video starts at a very late sequence of the first landing (attempt).But I ask myself how well trained pilots could come into such offset/mis-allignment at all when performing a Visual in excellent weather conditions (I think RWY Visual range >10km, Nosig?) and a working 2/3-bar VASI? Could it be strong cross-winds (I cannot imagine something different...)Thanks againSusan

[Guest Knikolaes]

Actually crosswinds was my absolute reason for thinking that -- it looked like they were drifting pretty bad there even while trying to correct.

[Guest Stassiebal]

Susan,Just for your information.... Windhoek is nowhere close to Kenya.... just happens to be on the same continent. It is in fact the Capital of Namibia. About 2000 miles to the South West of Kenya!De

[Guest neeraj.pendse]

Thanks for pointing to a cool web site!- Neeraj.

[Guest Cantuezel]

Did I realy said Kenya? :)I cannot express how embarrassed I am now...and that for a virtual female airline pilot...arghhh!!! :) :)Sorry for that!Have a great daySusan

[Guest Knikolaes]

Kenya -- by definition - a short abbreviation for Barbie's "Ken" saying "ya!"**giggles**

[Guest Stefan Bergert]

"We pull it up.... we have too much tailwind!" ... F/O @ 19sec. after video-start.Regards,Stefan

[Guest Cantuezel]

Thanks Stefan,I didn`t notice that before. But I still don`t understand why a (strong) tail wind component leads to such an offset of the RWY ctr...or is it a mix of tail-/crosswind?GreetingsSusan

[Guest Stefan Bergert]

Hi Susan!I even don't think there's really so much offset... I think the perspective is a bit bad because it's filmed from the right side of the observers seat.I also believe that without the tailwind it would have been a normal, safe landing, but obviously the tailwind was just slightly stronger than what is allowed. Maybe there was also some crosswind, but actually we don't know :-(Regards,Stefan

[Guest Knikolaes]

I agree. It could be the camera angle that had me thinking of the "lineup". I did not have the volume up near high enough to hear the remarks by the crew.

[Guest Cantuezel]

Hi Stefan,>...>I also believe that without the tailwind it would have been a>normal, safe landing, but obviously the tailwind was just>slightly stronger than what is allowed. >...1) OK, but when I watched the video carefully the PF chose the *same(!)* RWY (08) after performing the missed-approach to "try" the second landing, doesn`t he? Would that be the right decision to make after a tailwind induced go-around?As a rookie I would assume myself to approach the airport at the second attempt from the opposite side (RWY 26) to land now into the wind... 2) Generally: How does pilots notice that there is a (maybe too strong) tail-wind component? Is there only indicator the too fast (predicted) Final Approach IAS?Or are there special warning systems that announce kind of a warning "Tail Wind! Tail Wind!...etc."?Thanks again! :)Have a great week-end everbody...GreetingsSusan

[Guest glenb]

SusanI have followed your contribution to this forum with interest. You have asked some excellent questions and some of the regular experts have given outstanding replies to those questions.I would like to respond to your latest post to this thread in a different way. In a previous life I accumulated a few thousand hours as a flight instructor, instrument instructor and ag pilot. When I read your latest post I asked myself how would I reply if you were my student. You seem to want to have a procedure or instrument/computer warning for everything. A pilot must think and keep ahead of the aircraft. The pilot in the video made the decision to go around and then approach the same runway. We will never know what was in his mind. All we know is he made the decision. If you were my student and we had a bad approach (for what ever reason) I would expect you to make the decision to go around. Once that decision was made I would expect you to plan ahead and carry out the next step. Your question about using the opposite runway is good, that could be one of the solutions, but only one. We don

[Guest Cantuezel]

At first, thanks Glen for yur nice words! :)Well my answer would be: I would approach the RWY from the opposite side, so RWY 26 instead of 08. I think the controller of Windhow TWR also suggested to approach a visual onto RWY 26.So I really have no idea why the heck the PF chose the same RWY once again...:) :) (But I am only a PC-FS rookie...and don*t have the routine to calculate all relevant data for such a descision)But asking naivly: Am I right that there is no rule to approach a RWY from the other direction after a tail-wind induced go-around?GreetingsSusan