Close call at work tonight

[Ozark]

Air Force One did a go around today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/06/national/06PLAN.html?ex=1076648400&en=a2984c230d588d05&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[cpxxx]

So what it you had already had your three go arounds? Would you be forced to crash on your fourth??

But seriously I think the rule you're thinking of is in relation to missed approaches during Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). After three missed approaches it is recommended or even mandatory that you divert to your alternative. A missed approach occurs where you cannot see the runway when you reach the decision height or minimum descent altitude.  It could be because of fog or rain or whatever.

The danger is that you might be tempted to go below the decision height  if you try once too often.  The other danger is that you might run out of fuel before you get to your alternate when you waste too much time at your destination.

You can go around as often as you like if the rumway is blocked .

[Fishu]

Go-around is a flight normal procedure and there should be no restrictions to that how often pilots executes go-around.
Some companies can be very easy on go-arounds and does it even well above the minimum go-around altitude as a company SOP.

Somewhile ago over here in Finland, it wasnt too unheardable that a plane made 2-3 go-arounds just to get over it and divert to another field!

Just a "couple" days ago here was snowing *alot* over the night and only one runway was in use at helsinki-vantaa airport... to make it better, the ILS was made inoperative as well by the snow!
So they had to do VOR/DME approach, which does not have a glideslope like ILS and the visibility was poor.
Many flights ended up doing a go-around or more and then diverted to an another field... or diverted even before.
Some were diverted to almost 200 miles away, when the closer  airports ran out of space.

Was quite a busy day for EFHK ATC.


Suntracker,

How was the visibility at the time?

There are certain go-around minimums, based on CAT x classes, which are I II III and subversions. (ie CAT IIIb IIIc...)

CAT III is pretty much full auto-land, while CAT II and CAT I are manual flare & landing, but CAT II approach can be done on autopilot.
Each has different go around minimums, which by the 'runway' should be in sight or go-around should be executed.

CAT I 200ft, CAT II 100ft, CAT III 50ft.

If it had CAT II equipped and was coming to land, I can understand how it was low!
100ft is merely 30 meters....

[SunTracker]

Visibility was moon-less night (12:00am) with moderate fog and drizzle.

[Dingbat]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
You'd be surprised how close they fly those things.  It's scary.

Not that scary, I've got DCA (national airport) right outside my window.

I've seem the stacked where one aircraft is has left the runway followed shortly (maybe 30 secs) one landing.  Listen to it all on the scanner during lunch.

[jigsaw]

Originally posted by cpxxx
After three missed approaches it is recommended or even mandatory that you divert to your alternative.

Nope. You're under no FAA reg to go to an alternate at all.
You're only required to file one if certain conditions exist at your intended point of landing. If you have to go missed you can go any where you can get in to land.

Fer instance, you file from airport "a" to "b" but the visibility is forcast such that you have to file an alternate for airport "c". You have to go missed at "b", you're not required to fly to "c". You may even decide to go back to "b" on a different type of approach if one is available.

A go around or going missed is a perfectly acceptable and preferred option to trying to salvage a bad landing.