Most pilots are taught that executing a go-around is the prudent course of action if the landing is not progressing normally and a safe outcome is not assured. That is a good practice but it isn't always that simple. The pilot must be proficient in executing the go-around properly in the particular airplane being flown and must make the decision to execute the go around in a timely manner.

A downward force is created if power is applied while the airplane is in a nose-low attitude.

Much could be written about the execution of the go-around but I will only summarize here and I will limit the discussion to single-engine airplanes. The conventional wisdom in general aviation airplanes is to perform “power, pitch, flaps, gear” in that order. In other words, add full power, pitch for the climb, retract the flaps (at least partially), and then raise the landing gear (if flying a retractable gear airplane). That sequence worked just fine in the low-powered, high drag Cessna's and Pipers of the 1970s but the first two items need to be revisited for the new generation of airplanes introduced in the last ten years. The Cirrus and Columbia class of airplanes are more powerful and have less drag, which translates into a quicker response to the application of full power. Applying power with the nose below the level flight attitude produces a force vector in the down direction, just the opposite of what is desired in a go-around. Any force applied in the down direction will have to be countered by an equal force in the up direction. In other words, it is counterproductive to add full power with the nose still below the level flight attitude. Raising the nose to the level flight attitude before adding power eliminates this problem and allows all of the thrust to be used for acceleration. Continuing to pitch the nose up to the climb attitude (airspeed permitting) as power is applied allows the thrust to be an upward acting force in addition to its role in acceleration.

Full-flap landing in the first third of the runway

The sequence of at least partially retracting flaps before raising the landing gear continues to be correct. Extended flaps produce more drag than extended landing gear.

So the general technique for initiating a go-around should be

1. Pitch to the level flight attitude.
2. Smoothly add full power, first advancing the propeller control to the high RPM position if the airplane has a constant speed propeller.
3. Pitch to the proper climb attitude as airspeed permits.
4. Retract flaps as airspeed permits.
5. Retract landing gear.

Of course, the airplane should be trimmed as necessary so to avoid excessive control pressure.

It is important to remember that this is a general technique. Many manufacturers, especially the makers of the new generation of airplanes, are very specific about the go-around procedure to be used. It is critical for each pilot to study the POH before a flight in an unfamiliar airplane and to commit any special procedures to memory before the flight. After all, when the deer runs onto the runway as the airplane is on short final, it is probably not the best time to be looking up the recommended go-around procedure.

The go around procedure must be practiced in addition to being memorized. A checkout in an unfamiliar airplane always includes seeing how it handles in a stall. Knowing how it handles in a go-around is just as important.

Like everything else in aviation, it isn't enough to just practice the go-around technique during a checkout. It must be part of a recurrent training program so that it will be second nature when it is needed. A Cirrus SR-22 was destroyed and the pilot was fatally injured in Maryland in 2006. The pilot correctly decided to execute a go-around during a landing attempt but his failure to follow the manufacturer's procedure to retract the flaps to 50% for go-around resulted in a stall/spin accident. This probably would have been prevented had the pilot been involved in a recurrent training program.

A private pilot and his four passengers were fatally injured in 2005 in Louisiana as a result of an attempted VFR go-around in a Beech E-90 King Air. The airplane was observed approaching the airport an unusually high speed. The pilot apparently executed a go-around and pitched up excessively while entering a turn. The airplane stalled and crashed, exploding on impact. Though not addressed in the official NTSB report, the pilot may have had the airplane trimmed nose-high for landing at low power and failed to adjust the trim for the high-power go-around.

Knowing how to execute the go-around maneuver and being proficient at it are extremely important but still more is required. The pilot must possess the skill and knowledge to decide when to execute a go-around. Many accidents have happened because the pilot waited too long before deciding to abort the landing and the laws of physics prevailed.

A pilot executes a go-around toward rising terrain.

Terrain, runway length and condition, wind, airplane maneuverability, and other factors all affect the go-around decision. A general rule is that the airplane should be landed in the first third of the runway and if that isn't going to happen a go-around should be executed. But what about the runway that is barely long enough for the airplane, or slopes downhill, or requires a landing with a tailwind due to terrain, or is covered with packed snow? Maybe the first tenth of the runway must be the touchdown zone under certain conditions. (Maybe if landing on the first third of the runway isn't sufficient an alternate airport or runway should be considered.)

If the terrain ahead is flat and there are no obstructions, perhaps the pilot can wait and make the decision to go around as the airplane floats past the first third of the runway. If the terrain rises rapidly ahead, the decision to abort the landing must be made early enough so that the airplane can climb safely.

The result of landing long, fast, and delaying the decision to execute a go-around.

The pilot of a Piper Warrior, along with her two passengers, was seriously injured in Massachusetts in July 2007 when she landed too far down the runway traveling too fast. She then tried to execute a go-around but collided with trees. The left wing of the airplane separated and the airplane went done down into a swamp. This accident could have been easily prevented if the decision to execute a go-around had been made when it became obvious that the flight path would not put the airplane at an acceptable spot on the runway.

The pilot of this Cessna 150 was unable to climb over rising terrain during an attempted go-around.

In 2004, a Cessna 150 crashed in Virginia while attempting a go-around. The pilot was seriously injured and the airplane was destroyed. The crash occurred as the result of a stall while the pilot was attempting to climb over rising terrain off the departure end of the runway. The airplane was simply unable to climb more rapidly than the terrain was rising. Executing the go-around at a higher altitude could have prevented the accident. The possibility of a go-around must always be considered when planning an approach. This pilot allowed himself to get into a situation where he had no viable options once he descended for the landing.

Most accidents that occur during go-arounds follow an approach that was not stabilized. If the pilot is struggling to control airspeed, flight path, and runway alignment, the chances of making a good landing are remote. It is prudent to execute a go-around if the approach cannot be stabilized early. For more on the concept of the stabilized approach, click here.

Of course, a go-around isn't always the magic solution to the pilot's problems. If the airplane is too far down the runway with a slow airspeed, the terrain is rising ahead, or the density altitude is high, a go-around attempt might be a really bad idea. These accidents in which go-arounds were not successful show that it is sometimes more dangerous to attempt the go-around than to accept the fact that the runway will be overrun. It is a very difficult decision and it must be made very quickly if the situation presents itself. The terrain and obstacles that lie off the end of the runway must be considered, but it is almost always preferable to run off the end of the runway going 30 knots than to collide with terrain while airborne at 60 knots. It is also preferable to run off the end of the runway going 50 knots than to fall victim to a stall/spin accident at 200 feet of altitude.

In summary, pilots should always be prepared to execute a go-around if necessary. A safe go-around requires knowledge of how it should be executed in the specific airplane type, proficiency in performing the execution, and the judgment to decide when the go-around maneuver is prudent.

Your donation makes this site possible. Please click on the button above.