halls120

Mot of my flights have been on UA, and yes, most of my aborts have been on UA. I've a couple on AA. None on DL.

Good luck in your quest, but I don't think you're going to find the answer you are looking for.

FWIW, an aborted landing tells me the pilot is a professional who chose to not land when it wasn't safe to make an attempt. I like that attitude.

MarkP24

I was never on an aborted landing, but my wife and daughter once were, and it was due to HORRIBLE inclement weather at JFK with minimal visibility, and the pilot aborted the landing at the last minute. They were (as were most of the plane) incredibly frightened!

angra

I never said or even implied otherwise. I am thrilled that the pilot executed the maneuver successfully and that he exercised discretion to favor safety first. I thanked the cockpit personnel on my way out.

angra

Thanks for this suggestion and the background info! I did manage to locate some ATC discussion about the flight. The biggest difficulty was determining which feed to listen to - ATL has a bunch!

then some nav directions for the go around.

Again - nothing insidious here, no complaint, intended slight on delta, anything like that. Just posted here because it was Delta and maybe they had company-specific public info.

LarryJ

A go-around is a routine maneuver that is practiced at every training cycle and it isn't unusual to fly them on the line. They shouldn't be frightening to the passengers; only, perhaps, an annoyance.

Go-arounds, at least in Boeing airplanes, are not full power. The Boeing go-around power setting targets a 2000fpm climb which is less than the initial climb after takeoff. I would think that Airbus is similar but don't have never flown an Airbus.

The reasons for a go-around are usually one of the following:

1. Previous aircraft will not be clear of the runway prior to the arriving aircraft reaching the runway threshold. During in busy arrival pushes it isn't uncommon for the time between the previous aircraft clearing the runway and arriving aircraft reaching the runway threshold to be as little as ten seconds. The two airplanes are still more than a mile apart, at this point, so there is no risk of collision but it doesn't take much to eat up that ten second pad which will cause the arrival to have to go around.

2. Failure to meet stabilized approach criteria by the reject gate. Specific details vary by airline but there will be an established 'reject gate' which may be 500', 1000', etc. where the company procedures require the aircraft to be fully configured (gear/flaps), on-speed, engines spooled, on course, and with a descent rate under 1200fpm (sometimes 1000fpm). If you haven't yet met stabilized approach criteria at the reject gate then a go-around is mandatory. This usually results from ATC keeping you high, or turning you in tighter than you were expecting.

3. Low visibility. When the required visual references are not in sight at the applicable decision altitude or missed approach point a go-around is mandatory.

4. High winds/turbulence. When high winds/turbulence prevent a stabilized round-out, flare, and touchdown, result in a bounced landing, or extends the flare so that touchdown will not be within the designated touchdown zone, a go-around is prudent.

RacingJunkie

Only time I've had an aborted landing was in HNL and had another aircraft crossing the runway. Got almost to the ground and then throttled up to gain speed and altitude.

beachmouse

superpanjy

https://www.shine.cn/news/metro/1811135062/

Delta Air Lines pilot avoided what could otherwise have been a catastrophic incident when he aborted takeoff after spotting a Japan Airlines aircraft entering the runway at the Pudong International Airport in Shanghai yesterday.

kop84

That is great quick action by the pilot to potentially save 600+ lives. Now I want to know how many people called DL to demand for compensation for the delay...due to...not killing everyone on board.

guv1976

They should ask for compensation from JL!

ethernal

Kudos to them for getting the Delta A350 seating capacity right.. wonder where that 787 figure came from. It doesn't match the exit row limit for any versions but it is also way higher than what any 787 actually carries. Even Norwegian's 789s only carry 334 and they have no J cabin. Just seems funny since it gives the impression that the 787 is bigger than the A350 when the opposite is true (or, at least, the smallest A350 is equal to the the biggest 787-10).

mnbp

Aviation Herald has the story as well:

Incident: JAL B789 at Shanghai on Nov 13th 2018, runway incursion forces rejected takeoff

Mountain Explorer

Based on the diagram, there was almost certainly no actual danger, the A350 would have passed several hundred feet above the 787. Would have been an impressive view for the passengers on the left side of the 787. The passengers on the A350 wouldn't have known anything was unusual.

Still, very prudent of DL pilots to stop, take no chances.

flyerCO

Apparently JL is a frequent violator at PVG. According to an article six times in last two years.

ethernal

Without context of the violations of other carriers, this is not a useful statistic. There's a lot of anti-Japanese propaganda in China.