VFR Go- Around

bob44zw

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2011
108
1
18
Tower: "Go Around - animal on runway"

My student initiated a go-around with an offset. I said - no, you cannot offset without a clearance - if you want to offset, ask for a clearance.

Student said it is in the AIM - offset on a VFR go-around. I cannot find it in the AIM.

So I am teaching no offset, no crosswind unless cleared to do so or beyond the departure end of the runway and within 300' of the pattern.

What do controllers think?
 

jdatc624

Senior Member
Dec 30, 2010
161
2
18
Center/center/tracon
www.youtube.com
Tower: "Go Around - animal on runway"

My student initiated a go-around with an offset. I said - no, you cannot offset without a clearance - if you want to offset, ask for a clearance.

Student said it is in the AIM - offset on a VFR go-around. I cannot find it in the AIM.

So I am teaching no offset, no crosswind unless cleared to do so or beyond the departure end of the runway and within 300' of the pattern.

What do controllers think?

1st, I'm not a tower guy, and it's doubtful I will ever be one, but I am a pilot / dispatcher / artcc guy

-it comes from here:

Your friendly FAA practical test standards....

https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/media/FAA-S-8081-12C.pdf


Task L: Go-Around/Rejected Landing (ASEL and ASES)


References: FAA-H-8083-3, FAA-H-8083-23; POH/AFM.
Objective: To determine that the applicant:

  1. Exhibits satisfactory knowledge of the elements related to ago-around/rejected landing, with emphasis on factors thatcontribute to landing conditions that may require a go-around.
  2. Makes a timely decision to discontinue the approach tolanding.
  3. Applies takeoff power immediately and transitions to climbpitch attitude for VX or VY as appropriate +10/–5 knotsand/or appropriate pitch attitude.
  4. Retracts flaps as appropriate.
  5. Retracts the landing gear if appropriate after a positive rate
    of climb is established.
  6. Maneuvers to the side of runway/landing area to clear and
    avoid conflicting traffic.
  7. Maintains takeoff power and VY ±5 knots to a safe
    maneuvering altitude.
  8. Maintains directional control and proper wind-drift correction
    throughout the climb.
  9. Completes the appropriate checklist.




I Dislike the AIM since it's not regulatory so it's pretty worthless to me.
 

chkwheelsdwn

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2009
276
2
18
Osan AFB, Korea
Didn't even read what it said but as a previous tower controller, I always want to know if the pilots gonna off set left or right of runway. Helps plan for traffic and where I'm gonna sequence you in. Obviously if your the only plane out there it doesn't matter but I always want to know what the aircraft is doing. "Oh your off setting left traffic a piper on the left downwind blah blah......". I would think as well, your in the plane. Your the one that's gonna smack another if you do something out of the blue and keep secrets. I'd definitely let the controller know.
 

flyeagle111

Rookie
Jan 1, 2009
53
0
6
Not that I have much expertise, but IMO you'd only want to go around with an offset to the side if the controller specifically says "go Around right side." I'm curious what others' thoughts are.
 

StuSEL

Moderator
Aug 23, 2009
1,014
10
38
You know where.
If the go around is for an animal the student is wrong. A CFI who expects a maneuver to one side of the runway should not expect a student to do that for an animal. For traffic, the student would be correct.

The PTS requires this for checkride applicants if there is a traffic conflict, the idea being that as the aircraft moves left or right of the centerline, it becomes easier for traffic behind it (landing) or below it (departing) to see. A white fuselage over a white runway stripe, for example, is difficult to find depending on the runway. In the case where a go around is initiated for departing traffic, offsetting right or left makes that departing traffic easier to find.

Note the PTS says "maneuvers to the side of the runway" and not "maneuvers outside of the runway." The expectation is for the student to slightly offset from the centerline; in fact, this should not even be noticeable from the tower if done correctly. Therefore no special permission is required.

Bob, your point about not turning crosswind until being within 300 feet of pattern altitude and not until at the departure end of the runway is spot on. I've had one near midair as a result of another student and instructor not knowing that rule.
 

bob44zw

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2011
108
1
18
Our runway is 28 Right, so an offset to the left is problematic. We have a helicopter pattern inside the right pattern, so if a helicopter is on the grass, a right offset is seriously problematic.

I really like the interpretation above, where you move over just enough to see the departing aircraft below you.

We seem to have a helicopter problem - my letters and nicely colored drawings to FAA folks do not seem to be having any effect, but lately the controllers seem to be trying to separate us. It is always the folks doing the actual work that make the difference.

Thanks for the good responses. It was a deer, by the way - I saw it with my own eyes - figured they were mistaken and it was just a big coyote. It really was a deer, in the big city!
 

FM_Weasel

Senior Analyst
Dec 9, 2008
991
7
18
I Dislike the AIM since it's not regulatory so it's pretty worthless to me.
Haha, are you insane? It's a good reference based on regulations. Operating contrary to the guidance in the AIM can get you in hot water too, you know. But let's pretend for a second that it couldn't (even though it can). Let's also pretend that saying the "AIM isn't regulatory" isn't the single most trite saying on aviation forums (it is). It's still a good bit of reference material that shouldn't be considered worthless.
 

jdatc624

Senior Member
Dec 30, 2010
161
2
18
Center/center/tracon
www.youtube.com
Haha, are you insane? It's a good reference based on regulations. Operating contrary to the guidance in the AIM can get you in hot water too, you know. But let's pretend for a second that it couldn't (even though it can). Let's also pretend that saying the "AIM isn't regulatory" isn't the single most trite saying on aviation forums (it is). It's still a good bit of reference material that shouldn't be considered worthless.
It's a good reference, yes. I can possibly agree with that, a better one is a copy of the FAR's. How many of those do you have at the facility? We've got none, lol.

I've never seen a pilot get in hot water over the AIM. The AIM's guidance on climb or descent rates is basically never followed by pilots.

For or instance how about a situation where they do 500 fpm descent for 6k feet, hardly what I'd call optimum.... Why would I ever base any separation on what the AIM says?

Well, QA, I hardly think that was his optimum descent rate, so let's give him a pilot deviation, not me a deal because I failed to ensure positive separation, if he'd done an optimum rate, he'd have missed that guy with room to spare.

Ask QA at your facility. Couple of centers I've been at that's the vibe. It may seem trite, but I've been involved in aviation on the pilot side, the dispatch side, the skydiving side, and also the controlling side for 14 years. Maybe your experience is different.

When ATC has not used the term “AT PILOT’S
DISCRETION” nor imposed any climb or descent
restrictions, pilots should initiate climb or descent
promptly on acknowledgement of the clearance.
Descend or climb at an optimum rate consistent with
the operating characteristics of the aircraft to
1,000 feet above or below the assigned altitude, and
then attempt to descend or climb at a rate of between
500 and 1,500 fpm until the assigned altitude is
reached. If at anytime the pilot is unable to climb or
descend at a rate of at least 500 feet a minute, advise
ATC.
 

kaeXo

Senior Member
Feb 5, 2016
265
2
18
As a 10+ year tower guy. If I issue a go around without telling you an offset then you can do w/e you want besides land. 99% of the time I will issue the offset in relation to left or right closed traffic whichever I plan on using. If it's an aircraft on the runway then you must offset unless you have the required vertical separation. For an animal an offset is not required thus the student isn't right or wrong.
 

FM_Weasel

Senior Analyst
Dec 9, 2008
991
7
18
So what is the required vertical separation, VFR?
Generally, IFR to VFR vertical separation is 500ft. 1000ft if wake turbulence is a factor.

Some classes of airspace don't have a separation minima for VFR aircraft. In those cases, separation responsibility is limited to traffic advisories and safety alerts.

In all cases, the primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a collision. I think that about covers it.

Oh, I forgot to mention. This is all radar minima. Without radar these rules don't apply.
 

kaeXo

Senior Member
Feb 5, 2016
265
2
18
So what is the required vertical separation, VFR?

It would be the same minimum for a altitude restricted low approach which minima is 500ft AGL above the aircraft. The rule is though that the aircraft cannot be lined up for departure or departing. That is the minimum but if it's large or heavy then we are required 1000ft feet at my current airport. However if a go around is issued for a heavy on short final then we have much bigger issues to work out.

3-10-10 in the .65
 

bob44zw

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2011
108
1
18
We have helicopters crossing at 600' agl, with no separation from departures, go-arounds, or downwinds at 1000' AGL, and all that is blessed by the WP ADO. They must have gotten a waiver from the 500' rule.

Not to be too snarky about it, but sometimes it seems that adhering to the rules is a lot higher on the list than preventing collisions. In defense of controllers, they do not make the rules.
 

Stinger

Epic Member
May 24, 2009
1,561
21
38
Helicopters have the benefit of being able to get a lot closer to traffic than fixed wing is allowed.
Basically for a helicopter, as long as they don't directly overfly an aircraft, they can get as close as they want.
 

kaeXo

Senior Member
Feb 5, 2016
265
2
18
Yeah Helicopters are totally different. Same as LAHSO only certain aircraft are able to do it. There is no instruction on LAHSO for helicopters but legally you can still do it by having them land on the numbers. The FAA pretty much has nothing to say besides a couple small sections in the .65 nor do they care about them. Most of the rules are guided towards air carrier operations.
 

FM_Weasel

Senior Analyst
Dec 9, 2008
991
7
18
Required vertical separation for a go around and an aircraft on the runway is a different animal.

Basically, AOV/NTSB takes a look at the particular situation (if it gets reported) and they determine whether or not we (ATC) had airplanes too close together.

A go-around is a valid method of separating aircraft on the runway (it just happens to also be the least desirable way to achieve such separation). What gets looked at, after the fact, is whether or not these airplanes were in danger of colliding and whether or not the appropriate instructions were made to achieve positive control of the situation. In a non radar environment, they wouldn't even have the altitude data to judge radar separation minima. That's why a lot of our tower wake turbulence rules are based on time (2 minutes/3 minutes) unless radar is available.
 

bob44zw

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2011
108
1
18
I sure agree with that. Sending around a faster aircraft on final because a slower one is accelerating on the runway guarantees that, if there is a collision, it will be in the air and not on the ground. I have been the lead aircraft in a few of those deadly set-ups. Thank God for alert controllers - they turn the following aircraft. They probably have no choice on the go-around instruction, even though it is not optimum for safety.