If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user
From SKYbrary Wiki
|Category:||Loss of Control|
|Content source:||Flight Safety Foundation|
SKYbrary contains a broad-range of articles, references and further reading to assist airlines, air traffic control organisations, aircraft manufacturers and regulatory authorities with ideas for improving go-around training (see all the links below). Specifically, being able to tailor training to match operational scenarios that carry the most risk: in the spirit of an Advanced Training Qualification Programme (ATQP) if you like!
These three SKYbrary portals are useful starting points:
- Presentations and Papers from the Go-Around Safety Forum
- Videos of Presentations from the Go-Around Safety Forum
- Stabilised Approach Awareness Toolkit for ATC
This article briefly discusses the training opportunities that exist for training pilots, what go-around training is typically undertaken and what changes could be made to improve go-around safety.
Training Opportunities for Pilots
Pilot training, from ab-initio, through type-rating, recurrent and upgrade, is strictly detailed, to ensure that regulatory requirements are met and conditions of the Pilot’s Licence are maintained. This does not mean that pilot training is guaranteed to cover go-around safety in the most effective manner.
During the early stages of training, and particularly during type-rating training, go-arounds are a prominent skill that is taught, learnt and practiced. Primarily this training is to familiarise the pilot with the procedures for go-around and the consequential pitch, power and performance management. For example a pilot may conduct 4 go-arounds covering the normal situation (all engines working and go-around at DH) and high energy, balked landing and windshear cases . This training will typically be conducted in a Full Flight Simulator (FFS). However, FFS utilisation is expensive and pilots, at all stages of training, have many other training demands; therefore, there can be limited opportunities to fully explore realistic go-around scenarios. Courses using Zero Flight Time Training (ZFTT) may present more opportunities in the FFS, but this time is not guaranteed to be used for go-around training. During Low Visibility Operations (LVO) training the emphasis on go-arounds tends to be on loss of references and degradation of auto-pilot and auto-throttles.
Ultimately, all early training tends to be aimed at “qualification” and the scenarios that will be required during line and recurrent training once the pilot is “working”. Therefore, opportunities for realistic go-around training from representative scenarios are not necessarily available, or used.
Line and Recurrent Training
The annual pilot’s Line Proficiency Check (LPC) is a revalidation of his/her licence, and therefore contains mandatory requirements, which in relation to go-arounds, requires a go-around at DH with one engine failed. However, evidence suggests that the majority of go-arounds occur with full power available and using full power during a go-around can introduce a high risk situation. Furthermore, most go-arounds do not occur at DH. So, go-around preparation for the typical LPC could be considered unrepresentative.
During the biannual Operator’s Proficiency Check (OPC) the focus is on compliance with Company procedures and policies, and CRM, as well as achieving the cycle of mandatory training required by regulations. Once again, go-around preparation tends to be guided by these requirements and will typically be go-around at DH with one engine failed.
Training in preparation for LPC and OPC can involve Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) in a FFS. Only if the scenario used contains a situation requiring go-around and the pilots make the decision to go-around will any practice occur. However, LOFT is a validation of training programmes and operational procedures and is not to be used as a method of checking the performance of individuals, other than CRM.
So, Line and Recurrent training tends to be aimed at fulfilling regulatory and Company requirements. Therefore, opportunities for realistic go-around training from representative scenarios are not necessarily available, or used.
Airlines that are approved to run Advanced Training Qualification Programmes have much more flexibility in the content of their Line and Recurrent training programmes. Furthermore, it is a condition of the ATQP that operational performance data is used to tailor training scenarios; this will be Fleet specific and can also apply to individual pilot’s performance. This data will typically come from:
- Flight Data Monitoring (FDM) (FDM)
- Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA)
- Instructor and Examiner reports
- Industry experience (other airlines, ATC, regulatory authorities etc).
Under an ATQP the balance between training time versus checking/examining time is more in favour of training, unlike non-ATQP programmes which can be two-thirds checking and less than one-third training. Therefore, ATQP provides the greatest opportunity for realistic go-around training that is relevant to the Operator, the aircraft Type, and the individual pilot.
Current Go-Around Training
From the results of a worldwide airline survey (including both ATQP and non-ATQP operators) it seems that some airlines are taking the opportunity to provide more realistic and representative go-around training.
This slide shows that go-arounds from all the different phases of approach are included in some training programmes. Ideally each of these scenarios would be included in 100% of programmes.
As well as different phases of approach, different training programmes also include the following aspects to enhance realism:
- go-around with intermediate flap settings
- engine failure during go-around
- full go-around procedure (Missed Approach) – no vectors
- go-around policy (Stabilised Approach)
- go-around decision making
- distribution of tasks between Pilot Flying (PF) and Pilot Monitoring (PM)
- assertiveness of pilot non-flying
- standard cockpit call-outs
- go-around reporting
- lessons learned from Industry
Improvements to Go-Around Training
Ideally go-around training should be representative of real operational conditions and also cover situations which, if they did arise, would introduce the most risk (difficulty). On the first point appropriate training scenarios can be built from the feedback that some airlines use to build their ATQP (see above). On the second point, executing go-arounds under certain conditions can be extremely difficult and loss of spatial awareness) and situational awareness can lead to Loss of Control (LOC). Such a scenario may consist of low thrust and low speed go-around from a height below DH with all engines working, followed by a low stop altitude and a complicated Missed Approach procedure. The same sources of performance data that are utilised for ATQP can also be used to measure the success of go-around training by providing feedback on performance. Even those airlines that do not employ an ATQP, the same sources of data are available. They will have to create additional training time in the FFS to give pilots the best chance of safely executing a go-around in all conditions. National regulatory authorities can play a part in facilitating non-ATQP airlines to improve go-around training by becoming more flexible on the content of mandatory training and allowing some variation from go-around from DH with one engine inoperative.
Not all training occurs in the aircraft or simulator and there are many ways to provide feedback to pilots and to facilitate useful discussions on the subject e.g:
- face-to-face debriefings
- presentations during ground training
- FDM debriefings and simulations
- publications, websites and bulletins
Go-Around Safety Forum (2013) Findings and Conclusions
The Findings and Conclusions from the June 2013 Go-Around Safety Forum held in Brussels contain many useful ideas for consideration including Strategies and Conclusions for various stakeholders. These conclusions are not necessarily recommendations, but are valuable for stakeholders to use as starting points to improve go-around safety. Some of these are summarised below.
Go-Around Safety Forum Strategy
Eight Safety Improvement Strategies were agreed at this Forum. All of these strategies are ultimately relevant to training, i.e. policies and procedures need to be learnt and practiced, however, one strategy was specific to go-around safety training.
- Strategy 4 Ensure that go-around training and awareness appropriately reflect different risk execution scenarios.
Training Related Conclusions
General Industry Conclusions
Air Operator Conclusions
- Unstabilised Approach: Inappropriate ATC Speed Instructions
- Unstabilised Approach: Delayed Descent Instructions
- Unstabilised Approach: Late Runway or Approach Type Change
- Unstabilised Approach: Vectoring Resulting in Intercepting the Glidepath from Above
- Unstabilised Approach: Lack of or Wrong Information About Distance to Touchdown
- Unstabilised Approach: Vectoring into Short Final Distances
- Unstabilised Approach: Vectoring to Runways with Significant Tailwind Component
- Rejected Landings
- Missed Approach
- Go-around Decision Making
- Go-around Execution
- ATM Contribution to Go-around Safety
- Stabilised Approach
- Flying a Manual Go-around
- Go-around from Low Airspeed/Low Thrust
- Take-off / Go-around (TO/GA) Mode
- Go-around - Transition to Instrument Flying
- Stabilised Approach
- Operational Safety Study - Low Level Go Around, EUROCONTROL, Jan 2019
- Go-Around Safety Forum, Brussels 2013: Findings and Conclusions.
- Go-Around Safety Forum, Brussels 2013: Presentations.
- Go-Around Safety Forum, Brussels 2013: Videos of Presentations.
- Stabilised Approach Awareness Toolkit for ATC. SKYbrary Toolkit.
- Monitoring Matters. UKCAA Paper 2013/02.
- GoArounds: STEADES In-depth Analysis. Presentation by Giancarlo Buono. 2013. IATA.
- Go-Around Accident and Incident Report Review. Presentation by Capt. E. Pooley. 2013. The Air Safety Consultancy, FSF European Advisory Committee.
- Go-Around Safety Survey. Presentation by P. Kremer. 2013. Luxair and ERA.
- The Go-Around and the Instructor/Examiner. Presentation by Capt. D. deWinter. 2013.
- ^ The Go-Around and the Instructor/Examiner. Presentation by D. deWinter. 2013.
- ^ Go-Around Accident & Incident Report Review. Presentation by Capt. E. Pooley. 2013. The Air Safety Consultancy.
- ^ Go-around Execution. SKYbrary Article.
- ^ Go-Around Training Survey. Presentation by Capt. P. Kremer. 2013. Luxair & ERA.
Back to the Go-Around Safety portal