Go-around on Air Berlin's final long-haul flight #AB7001

[mad_fab]

That's a hell of a Go Around....

[Passenger]

The last Air Berlin long haul flight #AB7001 made a go around (probably intentional) and landed 08:02 local time.

That's a hell of a Go Around....

The pilots are suspended and the German CAA is investigating.
Source: Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/air-ber ... NKBN1CN223

[Yuqu12]

That suspension is so stupid. Why would you suspend pilots if 1) there are no more longhaul flights and 2) if AB stops flying next week?

[sean1982]

That suspension is so stupid. Why would you suspend pilots if 1) there are no more longhaul flights and 2) if AB stops flying next week?

They are not suspended from flying for AB. They are suspended ... full stop. Equally ridiculous though, They didnt do anything that the airplane wasn’t build to do, and as ATC was filming from the tower the manoeuvre was probably cleared by them as Well!

[luchtzak]

That suspension is so stupid. Why would you suspend pilots if 1) there are no more longhaul flights and 2) if AB stops flying next week?

They are not suspended from flying for AB. They are suspended ... full stop. Equally ridiculous though, They didnt do anything that the airplane wasn’t build to do, and as ATC was filming from the tower the manoeuvre was probably cleared by them as Well!

German press has a different story: some of the pax felt really uncomfortable during the procedure.

[quixoticguide]

This reminds me on the Cargolux 747-8 Delivery Flight Wing Wave in 2014.

[sean1982]

That suspension is so stupid. Why would you suspend pilots if 1) there are no more longhaul flights and 2) if AB stops flying next week?

They are not suspended from flying for AB. They are suspended ... full stop. Equally ridiculous though, They didnt do anything that the airplane wasn’t build to do, and as ATC was filming from the tower the manoeuvre was probably cleared by them as Well!

German press has a different story: some of the pax felt really uncomfortable during the procedure.

And how pax feel is the new law on what pilots are allowed to do flying/technically wise??

[Passenger]

German press has a different story: some of the pax felt really uncomfortable during the procedure.

And how pax feel is the new law on what pilots are allowed to do flying/technically wise??

The show go-around was not only stupid because of passengers' comfort, but also for passengers' safety. A pilot should abstain from doing show go-arounds with passengers onboard, how often it may have been trained on simulators. There are enough experienced pilots who cannot tell us anymore what went wrong during their go-around.

[sean1982]

German press has a different story: some of the pax felt really uncomfortable during the procedure.

And how pax feel is the new law on what pilots are allowed to do flying/technically wise??

The show go-around was not only stupid because of passengers' comfort, but also for passengers' safety. A pilot should abstain from doing show go-arounds with passengers onboard, how often it may have been trained on simulators. There are enough experienced pilots who cannot tell us anymore what went wrong during their go-around.

Are you so technically knowledgeable now that you can see from a video that a go around is dangerous? There are PUBLISHED go arounds which call for much steeper banks after initiation due to terrain than what was done here in DUS, and again, a go-around is not an abnormal procedure

[Passenger]

Are you so technically knowledgeable now that you can see from a video that a go around is dangerous? There are PUBLISHED go arounds which call for much steeper banks after initiation due to terrain than what was done here in DUS, and again, a go-around is not an abnormal procedure

You do not perform a show flight with passengers onboard. A bormal flight is: you take off, you fly, you land. And only if there is a safety issue, you go around.

[KriVa]

A go-around is not part of a show flight. It’s a standard manoeuvre every pilot in the world knows, or should know, and is capable of performing without much hassle. Extra workload, sure, but no hassle.
This amended missed approach is even described in the standard phraseology used by ICAO. (“In case of missed approach, early left/right turn to join left/right downwind.”)
There is NOTHING dangerous about the manoeuvre performed by the AB crew. In fact, if they were too high, whether intentionally or not, then continuing the approach would have been the more dangerous option of the two, by far.
A prime example of a more “extreme” standard missed approach? Our very own BRU. Check the missed approach procedure for some of the runways, and you’ll see that those standard manoeuvres would be a lot impressive from the passengers side than this was.
People should really stop being so uptight about everything, especially subjects they don’t know anything about. (This last part is not directed towards anyone specifically, it’s a generalisation.)

[Passenger]

It was not a missed approach. It wasn't even a go around. It was a planned show performance, a fly-by, with passengers onboard.

[sean1982]

It was not a missed approach. It wasn't even a go around. It was a planned show performance, a fly-by, with passengers onboard.

2 aviation professionals say it is ... you say it isn’t... nuff said

[luchtzak]

Please stop arguing about the go-around!

[AirOpinion]

I still think that you should never force passengers into an uncomfortable situation if it's not required. Some passengers might have liked this... but do not forget that there are also passengers in the back that just fly because it's necessary to get from A to B. Some of them not feeling relaxed at all during the landing phase and maybe even scared of flying.

[sean1982]

Please stop arguing about the go-around!

Actually, no I won’t, for the sake of this forum. When an inherently safe and normal manoeuvre is pushed into a corner of being “dangerous” and “careless” than, as an aviation professional, need to react. This scaremongering done by passenger is along the same lines as what tabloids do when “reporting” non events by their self declared aviation specialists with headlines as “mid air collision narrowly avoided” (tcas event) ... “jet plunged down from the skies” (moderate turbulence) .. etc ...

This is not a true representation of the facts and the only point is clickbait and sales figures.

[convair]

Please stop arguing about the go-around!

I think this one deserves to be discussed. It was obviously a show (the pilot reportedly said so himself in
https://www.reuters.com/article/air-ber ... NKBN1CN223) that has nothing to do in a commercial flight. Very immature behaviour for a pilot.

[luchtzak]

Please stop arguing about the go-around!

I think this one deserves to be discussed. It was obviously a show (the pilot reportedly said so himself in
https://www.reuters.com/article/air-ber ... NKBN1CN223) that has nothing to do in a commercial flight. Very immature behaviour for a pilot.

We will allow the discussion, but I removed a few messages that played the man and not the ball.

[Passenger]

When a commercial airliner is flying with passengers, the aim must be zero risk. This fly-by had a risk that is bigger then 0 on a scale 0-10, hence it was unsafe. How unsafe? That's up to the German CAA to decide.

The facts that the fly-by was approved by the Tower and that it was executed technically correct, is therefore irrelevant.

(And for every "it's approved by a professional", I could quote two professionals who disagree)

[convair]

2 aviation professionals say it is ... you say it isn’t... nuff said

Whom are you talking about? My aunt Daisy cleans aircraft at BRU, and she disapproves.