Re: causes of go 'rounds?

From:         rdd@netcom.com (Robert Dorsett)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date:         14 May 94 00:08:41 
References:   1 2
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1994.1220@ohare.Chicago.COM> tetrode@aol.com (Tetrode) writes:
>Interestingly, the pilot, in an effort to placate us nervous passsengers,
>mentioned that the reason for the abrupt nature of the maneuver was due to the
>manner in which the Airbus is programmed to respond to such a situation. He
>implied that the maneuver was more or less a push-button affair. Any comments
>on this from informed sources?

>From the Northwest Airbus comment, it's reasonable to assume it's an A320.
If the pilot had pulled back on his stick, he would have increased pitch up
to CLMax (maximum lift), while simultaneously engaging alpha floor protections
on the engines, which would spool them up to go-around thrust.  The 
combination of the two, especially in a light airplane, could result in a 
very high deck angle.

Most go-around situations don't require this extreme a maneuver, though; I'd
be interested in hearing whether Northwest (or Airbus) actually encourages 
pilots to fly that aggressively for routine go-arounds, or whether they try
to reserve them for windshear or evasion situations.  

Certainly, after the Bangalore crash, Airbus went at pains to emphasize that 
the airplane should be flown just like any other: by the numbers, well 
within the envelope.  Perhaps some crews have yet to get the message.  Or
perhaps this is how AI recommends the airplane be flown.  Any A320 pilots
out there?




--              
Robert Dorsett                                                       
rdd@netcom.com