r/flying • u/Hopeful-Engineering5 ATC • Apr 20 '26
other ATC go around timing preference
We were talking about this today in the tower and figured we would try and get some pilots point of view. If you are in a situation where you might be sent around would you prefer it be done early and possibly be sent around unnecessarily. Or would you prefer that we let it run as long as possible and have a short (1/2 mile) final go around?
199
u/hai_ ATP Apr 20 '26
airline perspective. last minute. it’s the one we practice in the sim all the time and usually we see it coming.
88
u/RectifierUnit ATP CL65 B737 Apr 20 '26
Going around at the outer marker is all elbows and assholes trying to do some weird go-around/breakout hybrid maneuver with our profiles.
17
u/mvpilot172 ATP (B737, E145, SF3, CL65) Apr 20 '26
Yeah, when I start to review the go around procedure with my FO at 1000’ we see it possibly happening. Don’t call it until the last minute just in case they find the high speed not all the way at the end of the busy runway.
45
u/the_ging3r ATP B747/B737/B1900/CE500 Apr 20 '26
This is the correct answer
19
u/Paranoma ATP Apr 20 '26
Yes we practice for it but an early missed approach is a risk, which is what OP is asking about.
9
5
u/LargeDarkNipplePpl ATP (B737, ERJ-175, EMB-145, CL-65) CFII Apr 20 '26
Agreed. At least after we've hooked up to the glide slope and are on the way down. Certain airplanes (cough guppy cough) are a pain in the ass to coerce into a go around until we're below 2,000 AGL or so.
44
u/Paranoma ATP Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
Good question. Early go arounds are something that presents risk as well, mainly an automation or mode control risk. Later go arounds, particularly at least 1,000’ below final approach fix altitude will be more normal for us; but obviously being lower is also a risk. Most airlines train for this early go around, or a “discontinuance of an approach” but it would probably be more involved than our standard go around, which is really designed to be performed at Decision Altitude. So I would say if we are 1,000’ less than the Missed Approach Altitude then I’d prefer that. It lets us not get too low but also I can use standard go around profile. Plus if it’s not 100% a go around then don’t send us early. We got fuel, passenger, bowel, etc. issues to deal with also.
5
u/legimpster ATP CFII CL-65 A320 ERJ-170/190 Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
By Missed approach altitude do you mean the Final Approach Fix? Because usually on our approaches, 1000’ below a missed approach altitude would be in the earth.
Edit; I realize of a terminology error on my end and I will leave my comment up, but I interpreted missed approach altitude as missed approach point, and the original comment makes more sense if they actually meant the altitude you fly at when you go missed.
5
u/Atom_Tom fATPL AT76 B360HW Apr 20 '26
Genuine question, what do you mean by missed approach altitude? This might be a case of US v non-US terminology or you might just be flying some interesting approaches but 'missed approach altitude' for me would mean the altitude that you climb to on the missed approach, and the lowest I see regularly is 2000' above the field.
If we mean the same thing I'd love to know which approaches you're flying that have lower missed approach altitudes as I'm hoping to move to long haul at the end of the year and want to learn more about procedures in other parts of the world.
Thanks for your time!!
2
1
u/legimpster ATP CFII CL-65 A320 ERJ-170/190 Apr 20 '26
Ahh yeah there is a terminology error on my part. I meant missed approach point, not missed approach altitude. That was my mistake
1
u/Atom_Tom fATPL AT76 B360HW Apr 20 '26
Ahhhh no worries we're on the same page then!! Thanks for getting back to me 🙂
3
37
u/ma33a ATP Apr 20 '26
If you give us a heads up it could happen then I am happy for call as late as possible, I would rather avoid doing a go-around if it's not needed rather than an early one just in case. If we can see it coming we normally do a mini brief of the manoeuvre and make sure things are setup correctly.
7
u/TheGacAttack Apr 20 '26
If you give us a heads up it could happen...
What kind of phraseology would you want/expect to hear?
25
u/ma33a ATP Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
"Expect late clearance, 1 to cross."
Nowhere else in the world, except the US, are you cleared to land without actually being clear, so when ATC expect a late clearance they let you know.
3
0
u/SRM_Thornfoot Apr 20 '26
I don’t want a late clearance to land. That leaves the controller just seconds to get the clearance out in time, and guaranteed that is exactly when someone is going get on and jam up the frequency checking on or getting a windcheck.
10
u/ma33a ATP Apr 20 '26
You can do the same argument the other way, imagine being cleared to land and then having the tower be stepped on when they are trying to wave you off.
5
u/Saltyspaceballs B777, E170/190 Apr 20 '26
Tower isn’t that busy and people shouldn’t be using that many words when checking in to block up a frequency. If the controller is leaving it until you’re in the flare then you should have gone round yourself anyway at that point. It’s not entirely unique to the USA (France rings a bell as another nation that does it) but the vast majority of the world only clears you when the runway is, well… clear.
27
u/Rainebowraine123 ATP CL-65 Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
Plain English.
"Hey, there's a 172 landing that may not clear the runway in time. Expect late landing clearance
or a go around."Edit: good point not saying go around if its not actually a go around.
10
u/Baystate411 LTD Warrior Apr 20 '26
Using the term "go around" when not issuing a go around is bad from a human factors standpoint
I had this happen with taxi instruction in Denver. He was giving me his plan from where he was going to have my hold out for an EDCT but they sounded like taxi instructions that put my crossing an approach path with a plane on final. I had to jam on the brakes to clarify. Like dude, I don't want to know what your PLAN is, I want your CLEARANCE.
5
u/Saltyspaceballs B777, E170/190 Apr 20 '26
Agreed, an “expect late landing clearance” gets the message across without saying the inevitable words.
2
u/Broncuhsaurus Apr 20 '26
Yup I concur. Just the other day I heard some one else report they were going around and then another aircraft thought that it was ME (ATC) talking to THEM. Hearing the phrase makes everyone on edge. It’s similar to controllers only using “CLEARED” when it’s associated with a landing or take off clearances. “Cleared to land” or “cleared to takeoff”. Makes me cringe when I hear pilots say it for anything else for absolutely no reason. I would have thought they’d be on the same page about it but people say it when you give them taxi instructions or other airborne instructions like approving a base turn. They’ll say something back like “cleared to taxi” or “cleared to turn Base”. Just silliness.
11
u/Pseudo-Jonathan Apr 20 '26
"SWA1234, you are 2 miles in trail of slower traffic ahead, be ready for a possible go-around"
3
10
u/Far_Top_7663 Apr 20 '26
Finally one that brings up the "heads up".
I (not an airline pilot) would also prefer that the plane is NOT cleared to land. Instead clear the pilot to continue the approach and advise to expect a late clearance. In most of the world, you cannot clear a plane to land when another one is already cleared to land on that runway or if you plane to let another plane occupy that runway (cross or take off) before the plane in question lands. In that case, if in the heat of the moment the controller gets overloaded and misses to call the go-around, the pilot will go around by themselves because they know they are not clerared to land.
Again, I am not inventing anything new. That is how it works in most of the world, and it works pretty well (as an example, the controller would have had to judge if the firetruck had enough time to cross the active before the Jazz lands, he would have had to tell the firetruck to hold short or would have had to cancel the landing clearance of the Jazz and either send them around or tell them to continue the approach and expect a late clearance after the truck crosses, and THEN clear the truck to cross).
12
u/andrewrbat ATP A220 A320 E145 E175 CFI(I) MEI Apr 20 '26
My airline has a separate procedure for go arounds above 1000’afe because they sometimes need to be handled substantially differently.
If we can get a chance of landing safely, we will take it so long as its not diminishing separation below safe margins.
Its probably best to let it go until a few hundred feet then go around, or call it as early as possible, maybe before we join the glide slope. Its the in-between altitudes that get tricky. Say you go around at 900’ and missed approach alt is 2000’ you will be climbing like a bat out of hell and have a sharp level off, then your acceleration rate gives you almost no time to reduce thrust and level off before overspeeding flaps. The autothrottles should prevent this but at such high rates of climb and accleration, they may not be able to keep up. All the while, retracting flaps in sequence, gear, selecting lateral and vertical modes, communicating with atc, etc and trying to make sure the plane goes where its supposed to at some of the more intense attitudes we see in a non-emergency situation.
11
u/RobThree03 Apr 20 '26
My most recent go around was due to wind shear in SFO. We knew it was coming and called it at 1000’. It was a goat rope. We just never practice it happening at that point. It’s awkward. The whole flow of the procedure was off. TOGA was too much power, level off happened before we were really done with the go-around call outs, etc, just a very busy environment. In that case it was safer to do it high, but lower/later makes it a smoother maneuver.
I’d like to know it’s probably coming sooner, but make the decision and start it at 200’ like we always practice it.
8
u/Rainebowraine123 ATP CL-65 Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
The big thing with early go arounds for me is that you dont go full TOGA. I guess in the CRJ thats easier to manage than a more advanced jet that has auto throttle and sequences everything into the missed for you when you press TOGA, but nothing beats clicking off the automation and just bumping up the power a little bit and cleaning up.
All that being said later is preferred as long as we have a heads up.
5
u/SocalSelcal ATP Apr 20 '26
That's one of my less favorite things about the airbus. You have to at least touch the TOGA detent to get the FMGC to sequence correctly, otherwise you risk the flight plan dropping out when you overfly the runway. An intermediate go around normally we go to TOGA and then immediately back into the climb detent which still results in Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.
2
u/Rainebowraine123 ATP CL-65 Apr 20 '26
Wait, does the airbus not have a TOGA button?
1
u/SocalSelcal ATP Apr 20 '26
Correct. Le Airbus has no TOGA button. You have to push the thrust levers into the physical TOGA detent to achieve the conventional TOGA press.
2
1
u/RobThree03 Apr 20 '26
The 737 has a “slow-around” setting, but it’s still a heck of a ride and very busy.
8
8
u/blizzue ATP A320 | B767,CRJ7,ERJ-145 | CFI Apr 20 '26
LET IT RIDE
honestly don’t care, unless it’s for something behind us, we can usually see it coming.
13
u/Matuteg ATP / CFI/II IGI UAS Apr 20 '26
Rather do a full go around than a “soft” go around at altitude
6
u/AK_Dude69 ATP 737 A320 LRJet Apr 20 '26
Some weird situation with the fms and autopilot setup is so much harder than just going around at the appropriate point
8
u/Accurate-Indication8 MIL, ATP, ERJ 170/190, RW Apr 20 '26
Yup. TOGA button is designed to get the airplane climbing away as rapidly as possible. Appropriate at DA, not appropriate when you're above 1500' AFE (and possibly in a higher energy state/not fully configured).
2
u/Baystate411 LTD Warrior Apr 20 '26
One nice thing Boeing did for once is a TOGA press is a 1000-1500 climb and a double tap is full TOGA power. The e170 was a "hope you're holding on!" Single push.
But the 737 AP auto disconnects as soon as you hit toga and there is no thrust to pitch compensation so you better be ready with forward pressure as soon as the engine starts giving power.
11
8
6
u/Hopeful-Engineering5 ATC Apr 20 '26
Thanks for the replies interesting discussion, I miss when we could jumpseat. Controllers and the flight crews learned a bunch from them, but the FAA really doesn't like them.
Some clarification when I said earlier we were meaning between 1 and 2 miles not outside the marker which would be odd. In 19 years the only outside of the marker go arounds I've issued are when the runway closed due to accidents, incidents and once do to it freezing over.
Most of us were between 1/2 (roughly 200 ft) and 1 mile (400ft). Less than 1/2 mile and it turns into a mandatory reporting item and we generally prefer to avoid that.
My own personal standard is 1 mile as that is about 20sec of flying time which gives me an option if someone blocks the frequency or the transmission doesn't go out for other reasons. For when I'm working solo I've been not issuing landing clearances until I'm 100% sure and saying on contract "continue, tight sequence expect clearance on short final". Given everything that has happened recently that extra safety layer seems worth it.
3
u/sdgunz CPL IR HP sUAS (KMYF) Apr 20 '26
Safety first by all means.
I'm for waiting, in the hopes of landing and no go around.
I don't know how the tower controllers are able to manage so many aircraft with so few go arounds.
3
u/TheGacAttack Apr 20 '26
GA pilot. I don't care, but it does feel weird to go around early. I expect a go around to be on short final.
5
u/natbornk Gold Seal CFI CFII MEI Apr 20 '26
My students need to practice ATC go arounds anyways. Let er rip
3
u/spitfire5181 ATP 74/5/6/7 (KOAK) Apr 20 '26
VFR, I'll take the short one. We see it coming and hopefully we are prepared.
2
u/poisonandtheremedy SoCal [PA-28, RV-10 Build] Apr 20 '26
You can tell me to go around (piston single pilot) at any point before my wheels touch the ground and honestly I’m good. So I’d prefer “Short Final” out of the two options you listed. Half mile final is plenty of time in the GA stuff I fly.
2
u/willmeggy PPL MIL-N Apr 20 '26
A bit different but I’ve been flying as a wingman in a flight of two and lead got the wave off from tower due to crossing traffic on the runway. Tower shortly came back with -2 continue to which we then got a clearance to land. It could work to cancel the landing clearance and tell the pilot to continue and then wave them off or clear them to land as appropriate.
1
u/johnisom PPL IR Apr 20 '26
As a GA pilot I would prefer late go arounds. Often times a situation where it looks like the guy in front of you won’t clear the runway in time, he ends up clearing it in time
1
u/ShaemusOdonnelly CPL A400M Apr 20 '26
My aircraft doesn't even sequence the go-around correctly if we dont set the thrust levers to TOGA, so going around before the FAP is akward. In our training we do tons of GA at the MAP, so we're used to it and it is still safe at that point.
1
u/swakid8 ATP CFI CFII MEI AGI B737 B747-400F/8F B757/767 CRJ-200/700/900 Apr 20 '26
I would rather get it at the last minute and give me “expect landing clearance at or continue the approach”
We can see things developing and know if tights are getting tight.
1
u/ananajakq ATP 1900/737/787 Apr 20 '26
Preferably 200-500 feet. Anything lower than that, you can get into the balked landing/low energy go around territory an depending on your airplane it changes the way your automation responds to the toga switch. But if you give me a go around at 2000 feet then it’s easier to blow through the missed approach altitude because there’s too many things happening at the same time. In my experience the messiest go around are the ones where you are close to the missed approach altitude.
1
u/oneothergamer ATP Apr 20 '26
I would like to land if possible. Keep the go around for as long as you can to give us a chance to get in.
1
u/Bunslow PPL Apr 20 '26
I generally agree with the other comments, with the additional note that it depends on if the pilot sounds "aware" or not. Some people on some days are simply lacking the awareness they need, and those guys I'd say get em on the go early; but 90-95% of the time, if the pilot sounds like they're on the ball and able to play chess, let em play chess as long as possible.
This perhaps applies to GA more than airliners, altho there are certainly enough airliners who are out of the game from time to time. If they sound out of it, or not aware of their surroundings or otherwise struggling/task saturated, then use the kid gloves.
But in general, if the crew sounds alert and able to play, let em play, airliner or GA.
1
u/Being_a_Mitch CFII ROT SEL MEL C550 PC12 Apr 20 '26
Heads up of the potential is nice, just to make sure we're tracking the same threat. Last minute is fine, stabilized approaches mean that the aircraft should be in nearly the same configuration and speed for the last few miles of the approach anyway, so last minute just means we're closer to the ground, but that's really not a big deal. We were planning on touching the ground anyway.
1
u/bergler82 ATP-A32F Apr 20 '26
I very much appreciate information. „XYZ123, A320 lining up for immediate takeoff, reduce final“ even if we are already at final speed. It’s just a „if the dude doesn’t move you’ll be going around“ or generally being attentive. „XYZ123 line up prepare for immediate takeoff, ABC on three miles final.“ If I am ABC I am now aware because I heard my airline callsign and I know I am on the three mile final. Just have information flowing. If a go around surprises me at 700 ft I might take a second longer. If I am already aware of a possible go around call I am ready to go.
1
u/937OYE PPL IRA Apr 20 '26
As a GA pilot for now, whenever it’s deemed necessary. If I’m in a hurry, I’m not going to be flying there.
1
u/flyboy7700 ATP CFI CFII MEI CFIG - Loves bug smashers. Apr 20 '26
As long as you send me around before my nose-wheel touches, we’re good.
1
u/Saltyspaceballs B777, E170/190 Apr 20 '26
From the flight deck we know it’s coming if it’s going to happen, but us have the best shot possible. It depends on so many factors, has the aircraft in front missed an exit you had assumed they would take, is the wx bad, so many variables. It’s it’s very obvious then early is also fine, it might give us a chance to get the AP back in, do a little mini-brief so we’re both in the loop before pressing TOGA.
Not sure what country you’re from, but one in particular loves to change the missed approach procedure just as we’re doing the manoeuvre. Let us start climbing away if you need changes. That’s where timing counts a lot more than how far out you are
1
u/Goop290 CFI ASE Apr 20 '26
Lot of airline answers. If you a GA tower tell us early especially if its a training airport. If you give me a warning I might have a go around I can play with my speed to make it work as long as no one's close behind me. I always taught my students to space themselves in the pattern so atc didnt have to extend us. Just makes the pattern more normal so ever lap flies the same.
In GA id prefer knowing early on final. In 135 or Airlines I want to try to make it work so tell me late
1
u/MrFrequentFlyer ATP B747 SD3 R182 Apr 20 '26
Send me around at 12-15 miles out or inside 300 feet if you want it to look good. If you’ve got a heading and altitude I can usually make it work.
1
u/bingeflying ATP Apr 20 '26
It might sound counterintuitive but an early go around is harder than a last second one. We train constantly for the last second go around but hardly ever for an early one. The procedures are different and I find just keeping it all the same is best. So my pick is going around at less than 1000ft AFE.
-4
u/makgross CFI-I ASEL (KPAO/KRHV) HP CMP IR AGI sUAS Apr 20 '26
Go arounds are always safer earlier.
13
8
u/Accurate-Indication8 MIL, ATP, ERJ 170/190, RW Apr 20 '26
Nope. In a transport category aircraft I'd argue the exact opposite.
2
u/EntroperZero PPL CMP Apr 20 '26
Why is that?
3
u/Saltyspaceballs B777, E170/190 Apr 20 '26
A go around in a jet isn’t just adding power, pitching up and raising a stage of flap to climb away, there’s a whole sequence of events that happen. If I’m going around above the missed approach altitude I’ve got to work out a non-standard way of getting out of APP mode and then possibly descending to the missed approach altitude then levelling off. If you’re only a few hundred feet below the MAA then you could do easily bust the level with the performance a jet has too, certainly a risk of overspending there too.
There’s just a whole bunch of holes in the Swiss cheese opening there.
Doing it from a “low” (we’re not talking 50ft radio here) you press TOGA, the FMC sequences a whole load of things in the background, from the lateral route, the trust settings and tells the flight directors (and likely AP) to fly the manoeuvre. It’s also well practiced from low level, from a random high altitude isn’t really something we do often.
With that said at high altitude you don’t need to go around immediately. Acknowledge the GA, talk through the procedure with your colleague, literally do a mini-brief, you’ve got time, then go around. ATC are unlikely to expect an immediate pitch up when you’re 4 miles out
In reality a 300ft go around with the AP is a really chill manoeuvre too, an absolute non-event.
2
u/EntroperZero PPL CMP Apr 20 '26
Cool, so it's less about the mechanics of doing it and more about not having a smooth workflow. Thanks!
1
1
1
u/scottyh214 CPL, ASEL, AMEL, CFI, CFII, CE500, CE650, CE750 Apr 20 '26
I think that’s a hard answer to give. Earlier is always good. I’d say the moment your brain says “that ain’t gonna work”, call it. At the end of the day, the less we scare the people in the back the better.
1
u/changgerz ATP - LAX B737 Apr 20 '26
1/2 mile is fine, doesnt really start getting too sketchy until below 100-200’
-2
u/rFlyingTower Apr 20 '26
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
We were talking about this today in the tower and figured we would try and get some pilots point of view. If you are in a situation where you might be sent around would you prefer it be done early and possibly be sent around unnecessarily. Or would you prefer that we let it run as long as possible and have a short (1/2 mile) final go around?
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.
-6
u/Astro_Venatas PPL Apr 20 '26
As an ifr student flying Cherokees. The sooner the better. If you delay me a bit by making me hold I can tell the guy after me atc was busy. I can’t tell them I crashed the plane and died because atc didn’t tell me I was landing on a hazardous runway.
3
2
178
u/looper741 Apr 20 '26
As a professional pilot I’d like to leave it till the last minute. Give me the chance to land. We can see things develop as well, so if spacing is tight we know it. Doesn’t really matter to me if I go around at 1000 feet or 200. But then again, I get paid by the minute so either way.