Archive for the fear of flying Category

Air Travel Delays: “Mechanical Issues”

Posted in air travel, air traveler, aircraft maintenance, airline, airline cartoon, airline delays, airline industry, airline passenger, airline pilot, airline pilot blog, airline safety, airliner, fear of flying, flight, flight attendant, flight crew, flight delays, FoF, passenger with tags , , , , , , , on April 21, 2018 by Chris Manno

IMG_6394

“Mechanical issues” may sound like a catch-all for airline delays or, to anxious flyers, a mysterious, perhaps worrisome possibility. But it’s neither, and here’s why.

First, you have to understand two main concepts: airliners are complex mechanical wonders, and second, their maintenance and operation is very strictly and minutely regulated–and documented. This second point is essential to the aviation regulatory standard upheld by all major airlines, even though such detail must be correctly, diligently accomplished. That takes time. So, let’s walk through the possibilities.

air FA smile 001

When you board an airliner, preflight checks are ongoing. This is especially true if the aircraft has just arrived from another station (airport). As soon as the flight completion checklists are accomplished, the preflight process begins anew by the crew. To waste no time, this preflight inspection goes on even as arriving passengers deplane and departing passengers board.

The checks ensure that all operating systems on the aircraft are up to the very specific standard set by the aviation regulatory agency that oversees commercial flight operations. In the United States, that’s the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Every system on that aircraft has an operational standard to determine if the aircraft is airworthy, and the jet does not move until those requirements are satisfied, right down to individual light bulbs.

Let’s look at that example: a light bulb.

If a pilot on an exterior preflight notices say, a landing light that is not working, this fact is immediately recorded in the aircraft logbook and the airline’s maintenance center is notified. The airline maintenance center will refer to the FAA specified “Minimum Equipment List” (MEL) for that particular aircraft.

image

Without straying too deeply into the very complex decision tree of the MEL, there are three possible outcomes for the noted discrepancy (a landing light is inoperative). First, the landing light may be replaced, tested and certified by an FAA licensed and approved aircraft maintenance technician.

Second, the item may be specified by the FAA-approved MEL as non-essential for flight under specified conditions. For example, if the aircraft is about to depart for a destination to land in daylight, the MEL may allow the flight to depart, with proper logbook documentation of the exception.

Third, the MEL may allow for a redundant system to compensate for the component. If the inoperative bulb was a wingtip position light, the MEL may allow the flight to operate with the remaining position light–if the aircraft has two and only one is required (that’s why the aircraft designer put two bulbs there in the first place).

This is the same with all aircraft systems: if there are redundant systems approved by the FAA MEL, the flight may be approved for flight with that waiver to use the backup system, once the discrepancy and waiver are properly documented in the aircraft logbook.

Of course, some essential systems have no redundancy. In those cases, prescribed repairs must be made by FAA-certified mechanics (example: a tire at the prescribed wear limit must be replaced). The discrepancy, repair and results must be properly documented before the aircraft moves.

And there are “consumables.” For example, on my flight last night, when we were doing our “Before Landing Checklist,” we noted that the engine oil quantity was at the prescribed “refill” level. That, like all aircraft specifications, is a very conservative number. It’s as if you were driving your car down the highway and noted that you had just above a half a tank of gas.

air airliner drive 001

You’d turn to your passengers and say, “The MEL says we must always have more than a half a tank of gas, so we’re going to exit the freeway and refuel now.”

In flight, I sent a data-linked message to our technical operations center noting the requirement for oil service before the next flight, which I also wrote in the aircraft’s paper logbook.

Our tech folks coordinated with the mechanics at our destination to have the oil ready and a certified mechanic to perform the refill. That’s quick and easy at one of our hub airports, because we have mechanics on staff there.

At smaller stations, airlines rely of FAA-licensed mechanics approved for contract mechanical work on specified aircraft. Of course, most airlines have access to normal consumables like oil or tires, but no one has every part on every aircraft stocked at every station.

route map NWA

If the required item is not in stock, it must be brought in, either from nearby (example: an airline’s LAX station may have an item needed for a flight out of Ontario Airport; staff can simply drive the part from Los Angeles International to Ontario). Other parts may be flown in on the next aircraft from the hub to the smaller station.

But either way, before the aircraft flies again, the prescribed maintenance procedure must be accomplished in accordance with FAA regulations and everything must be documented.

Most major airlines have this process streamlined for efficiency, like when I sent the data-linked message to prepare the arrival station for the required oil service. This was accomplished between flights with no delay. The certified mechanic noted the refill quantity and manufacturer’s details in the aircraft logbook as well as in the computerized records maintained at our airline technical headquarters.

But sometimes a procedure may take longer just by the normal time the process requires (changing a tire will take longer than changing a light bulb). Finally, the availability of mechanics at a given hour may add more time to the required procedure.

In all cases, the aircraft records must be meticulously documented, which takes time as well: approvals must be granted, remedial actions certified, and everything recorded both in the aircraft on-board paper logbook as well as the aircraft records at the airline’s technical center.

That takes time.

If the delay is predicted to be too long, we might be assigned another aircraft for the flight, which also takes time: passengers, cargo, baggage, and catering must be transferred to the new aircraft. So, if you’re waiting on board during a maintenance delay, it’s probably because swapping aircraft would take longer, or there isn’t another aircraft available.

To summarize, airliners today are complex machines with multiple parts and systems, all of which have MEL specified operating minimums. Not all replacement items are available system-wide, and and even where mechanics are immediately available, remedial processes can take time.

The “mechanical delay” we experience is due to the airlines’ unwavering adherence to very specific FAA standards.

The good news is, that’s why air travel on major airlines is as reliably safe as it is.

image

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Fear of Flying: Turbulence In Perspective.

Posted in air travel humor, air traveler, airline, airline cartoon, airline industry, airline passenger, airline pilot, airline pilot blog, airline safety, fear of flying, flight, flight attendant, flight crew, FoF, travel, travel tips with tags , , , , , , on April 2, 2018 by Chris Manno

image

It’s not unusual today to hear about travelers who fear air travel for a variety of good reasons. Fortunately, there’s help dealing with such fears readily available on social media in the form of special interest groups.

There are several Facebook groups centered around “fear of flying,” but here’s the best  one I’ve found:

logo fearful flyers logo

In this group, we (I am a member) in a closed forum for everyone’s privacy, using real names, share techniques and experiences that have helped many of our  members successfully get airborne on an airline trip that they’d previously felt was out of their reach. To join, click here and request access–it’s free.

My role there, besides providing cartoons of questionable taste,

air coffee piss 001_LI

is to share what I’ve learned in 40 years as a professional pilot: 7 years USAF pilot, 33 years American Airlines pilot, 26+ as captain. I truly believe that much of the anxiety that comprises fear of flying can be attributed to fear of the unknown. Here, and on this Facebook page, we bust the myths and fill in the blanks to empower air travelers so that they can embark on a trip with family and friends with quiet confidence.

Here’s one of the most frequently discussed anxiety-producing flight effects we’ve discussed there recently:

Turbulence in flight: is it dangerous? The answer: no. Annoying maybe, startling probably–but not dangerous. The fact is, just like any fluid–the ocean, a river, a lake–the air has eddies and currents that change with velocity (both the fluid and the vessel) which may result in bumpiness.

But, your aircraft is designed with more than enough strength to handle any      turbulence.  Without getting lost in the mathematical and engineering jungle, here’s a thumbnail design sketch. Aircraft manufacturers were given design standards to meet that basically derived a “load[1]” limit the aircraft must withstand in normal flight. To that they added a generous margin and called that the “limit load factor:” the aircraft must withstand this force without suffering any damage or distortion of the structure or flight controls. To that increased margin they again added an additional percentage of force the jet must be able to sustain without experiencing structural failure and that is called the ultimate load factor.

air applaud pilot ego 001_LI

To put limit and ultimate load factors into perspective, those forces are beyond that ever experienced by an airliner in flight and quite frankly, approach the limits of human ability to tolerate such forces. In other words, the strength envelope is way beyond the endurance of our “2 mile per hour man.” That means your remarkable aircraft is built to superhuman strength standards and will tolerate external forces in flight and even on landing that will protect you well beyond any forces you could possibly encounter in flight.

The next tier of wonder is how aircraft designers maintain Sherman-tank strength standards in a vehicle light enough to fly not only smoothly but also economically and in of thrust required to sustain flight, efficiently. This is achieved through the ongoing evolution of composite materials that are lightweight but even stronger than older, heavier metals, and advanced engine technology that has produced powerful, lightweight and efficient engines.

IMG_6467

This is once again part of the “aviation learning curve” that is the driving force behind commercial aviation: new technology, advanced materials both metal and composite, that are lighter and stronger than in decades past.

Aircraft manufacturers continue to improve designs, producing safer, stronger, more efficient airliners year over year. I’m often asked my preference between the two largest commercial airliner aircraft manufacturers, Boeing and Airbus. I honestly believe both manufacturers produce outstanding, safe, and capable airliners, though I’m a lifelong Boeing pilot at heart. That said, one of the most capable and naturally talented airline pilots I know—my son—flies an Airbus. They’re both great aircraft.

jumpseat

Me hitching a ride in my son’s Airbus 320 cockpit as he flew us to O’Hare.

That’s the kind of real-world, insider info and firsthand experience we share in this Facebook group. Join us, if you’d like to learn and share.

Also, I wrote this book for the group and periodically, reduce the Kindle price to zero for a few days so everyone in the group can get the book free:

FoF w border

In this book, I walk you through a normal flight after providing you with a realm of behind-the-scenes experience in the airline pilot world. You can get a copy HERE, or just join the group and wait for the freebie offer.

Either way, if your travel options are limited by fear of flying–yours or a travel partners–just know there are assets available that will get you safely and confidently into the air. The choice is yours.

air danger flight

[1] In laymen’s terms, “load factor” refers to the number of G’s, or the force of gravity, the aircraft must be able to tolerate.

 

Fear of Flying: Free Kindle March 25-26

Posted in air travel, air travel humor, air traveler, aircraft maintenance, airline, airline cartoon, airline cartoon book, airline delays, airline industry, airline passenger, airline pilot, airline pilot blog, airline safety, airline seat recline, airline ticket prices, airliner, airlines, airport, aviation weather, cartoon, fear of flying, flight, flight crew, flight delays, FoF, jet, jet flight, mile high club, passenger bill of rights, passenger compliance, pilot, travel, travel tips, weather, wind shear with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 24, 2018 by Chris Manno

If you are a victim of fear of flying, either directly (you are fearful) or indirectly (a friend or loved one won’t fly), here’s a resource, free:

Cockpit insight, practical coping strategies, explanations and … cartoons!

Get your FREE Kindle copy–CLICK HERE.

Fear of Flying: Flash Sale 30% Off

Posted in air travel, air traveler, airline cartoon, airline industry, airline passenger, airline pilot, airline pilot blog, airline safety, airlines, airport, fear of flying, flight, flight attendant, flight crew, FoF, passenger with tags , , , , on September 29, 2017 by Chris Manno

BookCoverPreview half

This book has helped many overcome their reluctance to fly, opening up a whole new world of travel and adventure for themselves and their families. The foundation of the book is, the more you know about your flight, the less that fear of the unknown can run wild with your imagination.

Here’s a free sample and at the end, a code for 30% off.

Chapter 2: It’s All About You

No, seriously—it really is: no other area of either transportation or technology has ever been more specifically and consistently engineered, designed, regulated and enforced with you, the passenger, as the focal point than modern air travel.

Sure, there’s a National Highway Safety Commission and various government agencies regulating driver’s licenses, and there are standards for auto and truck manufacturers. But those are nothing compared to the rigid airworthiness standards to which all commercial aircraft are built and tested, and nowhere near the year-round scrutiny given to pilots through unrelenting FAA checks in flight, in the doctor’s office, and in recurring background checks.

That’s a wonderful, unique thing in an increasingly complex and high speed world of transportation, and safety statistics show how air travel has advanced above and beyond all other modes of travel.

There’s a learning curve in the airline industry that has improved steadily since the early days of airline flight in the 1930s: accident rates have steadily dropped year over year and aircraft and engine reliability has increased in a parallel vector.

I recently had an aviation magazine editor ask me what I would cite as the primary cause of engine malfunctions that lead to a flight cancellation. I answered honestly that I’ve been flying on my particular fleet for over six years and I’ve never experienced an engine malfunction in that entire time.

That wasn’t so about twenty years ago, before aircraft and engine technology had advanced to its present state of reliability. But that’s the aviation learning curve: since the late 1990s, the advent of constant, data-linked engine monitoring now sends a wide array of engine parameters from the jet in cruise to a maintenance and engineering data analysis center that catches nascent faults and liabilities way before they become failures.

Last month I received a message in flight from our maintenance and engineering center asking me to check the vibration reading on a particular engine, because it was reading a bit high to them on the ground. Engine failures “on the wing” as we call them, are so rare that they actually make the news when they happen.

There’s a learning curve success story: decade after decade, we’ve developed new technology and hand-in-hand with strict regulatory enforcement, the airline biz has lowered the flight risks and added new layers of accident prevention and aircraft reliability.

By contrast, the automobile and highway transportation sector’s safety record has stagnated and even regressed over the same time period as air travel has improved: the traffic accident and fatality statistics have actually worsened as more cars hit the road and as speed limits are raised. Little is done to regulate or retest drivers other than observation and apprehension by a law enforcement officer. Even less is done to determine accident cause factors and develop technological and regulatory improvements to lower passenger risks.

By comparison, the air travel safety imperative is unprecedented, the standard uncompromisingly high: everything involved in air travel is geared toward passenger safety. Licensing of pilots, certification of training, manufacturing standards and operating restrictions for airlines are so constrained that if an equal measure were applied to the highways and drivers, the roads would be vastly safer—and nearly empty.

No government inspector climbs into a big tractor trailer rig to ride along and evaluate a trucker firsthand several times every year.

There’s not a government regulator assigned to a trucking company to monitor records, safety and training not to mention vehicle maintenance and repairs. Truck manufacturers have some rudimentary safety and fuel mileage standards, but the vehicles are not inspected by government licensed and tested mechanics daily.

No automobile driver is required to renew a driver’s license every nine months with a graded road test, plus oral and written exams, not to mention a government controlled physical exam with a specified doctor reporting results immediately to the government, never mind the periodic background check and the no-notice, no-refusal “we’re going to ride with you” spot evaluation.

By contrast, your flight crew—front (pilots) and back (flight attendants)—are constantly monitored, tested and certified.

That why air travel safety has improved annually while highway safety muddles along or actually regresses, and annual traffic fatalities remain at staggeringly high rates. Yet, the paradox remains: hardly a mention of “fear of driving” is made even in the face of thousands of lives lost on the highway annually, while fear of flying is a very real dilemma.

All of aviation is not safety-driven as is airline flying. In the military, the mission was primary, my safety as a pilot secondary to that. We accepted that, and many still do flying for our military.

By contrast, the entire airline aircraft design, engineering (we’ll talk about that later) and  manufacturing industry all telescopes down to one objective: you, and your safety. Same goes for the training, licensing, nonstop testing and evaluation of pilots, dispatchers, air traffic controllers and aircraft mechanics. In military terms, you and your flight  are the mission.

That’s the compelling force that drives the airline industry, and it’s all about you. While that might be hard to see when you’re enduring the hassles of security, and check-in, and boarding, it’s a powerful awareness to keep in your hip pocket: rest assured, everything about the jet you fly on, the crew that flies and maintains it, and the air traffic controllers who guide it have you as their focus. You are the mission.

So, recognize this windfall for what it is. Compare your clear priority in airline travel with the abject failure that is highway safety, a risk you live with every day. Air travel is actually your safest place, the one technological juggernaut where it really is all about you.

We’ll go into more specifics on who’s flying your jet, but for now, keep in your hip pocket the monumental safety success that has been designed around you the passenger, making air travel the safest mode of transportation you will ever take.

Remember the objective stated in the foreword to this book: empowerment is the key here. You’ve made a choice to learn about flight, to consider whether you want to give it a try. That’s real control because at any point, you can stop. You really are in charge and anything but powerless.

Stay with that decision for now, knowing it’s not set in stone—you can change your  mind—and let’s expand your fact-based knowledge of airline flying.

Quick Reference Summary

  • Aircraft design, engineering and manufacturing is regulated with you as the central priority.
  • The air travel learning curve in the United States has refined the industry and minimized risk factors over many decades.
  • High-tech, data-linked systems monitor aircraft systems performance and preempt failures.
  • By comparison, the risk factors associated with everyday highway traffic far outweigh the well-managed factors of air travel.

Order  your copy now with and use this 30% off discount code at checkout    2N7CUXXU 

Regular price: $9.99 Your price: $7.99 Order now–offer expires October 7, 2017

To order, CLICK HERE.

createspace screenshot

 

 

Fearful Flyers: Here’s Help

Posted in airline passenger, airline pilot blog, fear of flying with tags , , , , , on September 10, 2017 by Chris Manno

BookCoverPreview crop

The more an airline passenger knows, the less possible it is for the unknown to overinflate itself and stand in the way of your travel with family and friends to fun, faraway places and adventures.

Here’s an insider-look with street-level explanations for everything you’ll encounter from your doorstep to the airport to your seat on the airplane: sights, sounds and sensations–what to expect, and why.

If you have a fear of flying or worse, if you’re unable to fly because a loved one has that fear, thereby grounding you too,  here’s an easy, accessible, low-key way to start the reassurance that leads to air travel.

If you relate to the JetHead blog–you’ll love this book. Get yours now, from Amazon Books.

To order, CLICK HERE.

Amazon order page

 

 

The REAL Captain’s Guide: How To Fly That Crap Weather Approach.

Posted in air travel, airline, airline passenger, airline pilot, airline pilot blog, airline safety, fear of flying, flight crew with tags , , , , , , on September 30, 2016 by Chris Manno

image

First, let’s define “real” captain. I don’t mean “real” in the sense of physical, tangible, bad-layover-clothes, mouth-breathing captain, although I’ve been one at a major airline for 25 years and counting. You’re “real” as a captain on Day One when you’re turned loose with the rating.

What I mean by “real” is as in, “get real.” That’s because we know there are several things you face as captain with the dogshit weather approach. First, there’s what you’re told. Second, there’s what you know. Finally, there’s where the reality plays out: from the final approach fix inbound at 180 knots across the ground. There’s stuff you need to do to be ready for that.

The first item, “what you’re told,” includes the OpSpec that allows you to do what you’re about to do: fly a big jet with a lot of folks–including your crew–into minimally adequate weather for landing. OpSpec includes a minimalist element (what’s the least we can send you into the most challenging weather?) that allows airlines to earn revenue for what you’re about to do.

air applause anger management

What you’re told also includes the prevailing weather at the time they told you, which is nowhere near the time at which you’ll actually fly the approach. If I sound like a captain who’s had that detail bite him in the ass–it’s because I am.

So, here’s the BTDT viewpoint that goes beyond the classroom and the manuals. Not interested in stuff beyond the books? Don’t need the BTDT captain viewpoint? Please close this blog page now. No harm, no foul. Best of luck.

Okay, still here? The others gone? Good.

image

First, your approach starts in the chocks before pushback. No, I don’t mean “be the dork who starts stressing or worse, briefs the approach before engine start.” Rather, I mean be the captain the FO can rely on as soon as you sit down. Stay the hell out of his way as he (or she)  works. Respect–but check–the setup of the cockpit for takeoff. You ain’t perfect, so don’t expect your FO to be, and let him (or her) know YOU can be counted on as a team member to be sure you both do well from the first checklist. That’s what you want later: a collaborative, respectful environment where your FO knows you’re relying on each other step by step. The FO needs to be looking for and free to point out your screwups.

Second, “what you’re told” versus what you know can be tricky. Weather forecast versus delays you’ve seen versus altitude restrictions and the list goes on: variables, unreliables, despite “what you’ve been told.” But what everyone knows is this: fuel equals time. When that sixth sense picks at the back of your brain saying we might could use more fuel–you really do so get it before release. If you’re wrong (trust me, you won’t be–the only time you can have too much fuel is when you’re on fire) then you land with more time options. But if you’re at minimum fuel you’ll have to tear the seat cushion out of your ass after landing because your butt cheeks ate it up like horse’s lips do while you stressed about weather delays.

image

Finally, downwind. If you’re flying, relax: you’re not that asshole captain showing how it’s done (okay, you really are) but rather, you’re doing what you know to your core you’re damn good at. So, be humble, be quiet, be methodical, procedurally correct and do exactly what’s called for. Show your FO how you want the approach flown.

FO flying? Even better: relax, back up everything done, think ahead of the jet and while you do, let the FO do the flying exactly as it’s supposed to be done. Getting slightly off track? Guide back to best practices with suggestions, positive affirmations and last resort–LAST RESORT–directive, which sounds like “Let’s go ahead and ____” or “I’m not comfortable with ____.”

Remember, if what you’re told hours ago before takeoff matches what you encounter at the final approach fix, that’s a coincidence. You fly “real” based on what you know, which includes every experience and subsequent intuition derived therefrom–apologize to no one, get the fuel you need and decide for yourself if OpSpec minimums are adequate to meet the challenge facing you in realtime. We don’t fly on paper, on a spreadsheet, or on a chart of minimums page. Remember the horse’s lips/seat cushion metaphors: get fuel, think ahead, respect your FO, believe what you know (school of hard knocks) and fly smart, conservative and REAL.

Then, from Final Approach Fix to touchdown or go-around, you’re smart, confident, safe, and real. No one can ask you for more and as captain, you cannot do anything less, nor accept anything but the best you can do, by leading, coaching and most of all, being real.

Fly safe, compadres.

image

Air Travel Mythology: The “Aborted Landing”

Posted in air travel, airline cartoon, airline industry, airline passenger, airline pilot blog, airline safety, airliner, fear of flying, flight crew, jet flight with tags , , , , , , on February 17, 2015 by Chris Manno

737 landing crop

Air a Travel Mythology: The “Aborted Landing”

In social settings, I never bring up the fact that I’ve been an airline pilot at a major carrier since 1985. Because when I do, the mythology springs forth: tales of “harrowing” flights, near disasters, plus lost luggage (not my department anyway).

The flight myth most typical is, in passenger-speak, something like this: “We were about two feet off the ground when the pilot ‘gunned it’ and we shot straight up.” Gunned it?

Ah yes: the go-around, as we call it. We don’t call it “aborted landing” and in fact, until we get on the runway it’s not a landing anyway. Even after touchdown, the only option other than stopping is a “rejected landing,” which is a methodical procedure to get back into the air safely.

The main point is this: all of these options are planned for, procedurally set out and practiced, and in a nutshell–not a big deal.

fd1

Here are the facts, step by step, of a missed approach.

First, the urban legend needs revision. From an airline pilot standpoint–and this is the airline philosophy, in writing–a missed approach is considered a successful approach. In other words, landing is not mandatory for a successful approach. In fact, unless all of the many restrictions upon which a landing is predicated are met, a missed approach is the desired outcome.

There are a number of reasons why a missed approach may be required and the most common reason is not the one most people think of: weather. Rather, is the more mundane issue of spacing.

More specifically, that “spacing” refers to the distance between aircraft landing and ironically, this is typically a good weather problem. In bad weather, aircraft are well-spaced by radar and further, speed is typically assigned by the air traffic controllers. On a clear day, aircraft are allowed to “see and avoid” and thus are not spaced as far apart, nor is the speed as rigidly assigned.

So, now and then one aircraft on final approach may not have enough space behind another aircraft just touching down, which could mean the first aircraft might not be off the runway before the following aircraft would touch down. That’s a no-fault situation: maybe the first aircraft needed to slow down earlier than normal, or, as at DFW today, due to construction some runway exits may be closed, requiring a longer landing rollout.

BA 747

Or, often enough, an aircraft is cleared for takeoff as you approach and they might take longer than expected to roll. That’s routine and actually, it’s their runway once they’re cleared for takeoff. So, we may need to go-around.

The pilots in the second aircraft can see the spacing problem develop and there may be a few things that can help: you could slow to your final approach speed–but I also consider the plane behind ours and how that affects his spacing on our aircraft.

My rule of thumb is usually this: if the aircraft ahead touches down or starts takeoff roll and we’re still at 500 feet or higher, it’ll probably work out. Less? We’ll likely go-around. When we do, the process will be routine and simply, methodically by the book: smoothly add power, arrest the descent, bring up the landing flaps and their drag, retract the gear and smoothly climb to the assigned missed approach altitude and following the prescribed course.

No big deal from the cockpit, but it takes you by surprise in the cabin where you can’t see the situation developing. When power is added and the nose pitches up, the sensation in back is much more dramatic, particularly behind the wings and especially near the tail (ask any flight attendant) where the swing is more pronounced.

Sometimes the power can be overly dramatic: we have a power setting designed for a go-around, but it’s predicated on a last second escape from the lowest descent altitude on the approach–50 feet above the runway, in the Boeing 737-800 I fly. But seldom is the missed approach executed at that rock-bottom minimum, so that much power isn’t really necessary.

image

 

Trouble is, some of the older jets like the MD-80 have autothrottles that know only to set the maximum setting if the go-around power toggle is activated. That causes a dramatic pitch up that may feel, in the words of the immortal Dr. Dole at USC Flight Safety and Accident Investigation Center, that you’re “climbing like a stripedy-ass ape.” Startling to say the least and why many pilots of those older aircraft disengage the autothrottles and manually set power on a go-around from a higher altitude.

Newer jets like the Boeing I fly today have two go-around power settings available with the autothrottles engaged, one with the maximum power response, one with a reduced, more comfortable setting.

A go-around from an approach minimum altitude is the exact same procedure, only with the full power setting, which will make the maneuver more pronounced but nonetheless, routine. That’s necessary for safety: we want maximum terrain clearance with no delay, so the exact same procedure is followed, just more aggressively due to the full computed thrust used.

image

When I see the need for a go-around developing, the first thing I do is talk to the other pilot, getting us both ready to execute the litany of steps if need be. If we’re down to the approach minimums, there’s really nothing to discuss: we execute the standard go-around maneuver.

Traffic problems and spacing are the usual reasons for a go-around, but there may be the occasional go-around due to weather minimums. There’s no “gunning it” or fire-walling the throttles like in the Hollywood depictions, just a methodical and prompt setting of the required engine thrust and an arrested descent, then climb.

In either case, don’t expect to hear much from me on the PA, because in a go-around both pilots need to focus on flying: the altitude, the procedural track, the aircraft configuration and speed. If we’re going around due to weather minimums, we’ll also likely be setting up the navigation and securing the clearances to divert; if not, we need to get re-sequenced back into the landing pattern. None of that on a two man crew works well solo, which is what a PA would require.

So I’ll get to it when and if I can. If not, explain all this to the guy next to you, and relax. Because now you know a go-around is just routine.

More questions about air travel and your flight? Here are the answers:

Cover Airline Book 1

 To get your copy,  just click here, or search Amazon.com

 

 

%d bloggers like this: