Yes - we call that the "moonshot" takeoff....

If you are commenting on my video, then I am confused. I was listening to Channel 9 (remember the good old days when that was possible?) and ATC continued to ask the CX 747 on the parallel approach to slow down. After the CX 747 said they could not slow further, we were sent around. Our captain was grumpy about it and questioned ATC. They told him to call when we landed but blamed the CX 747 for not slowing for our go-around. I may be totally wrong about the actual cause, but that was what I heard.

Had my second one ever the other day, landing at SEA. My first was a runway incursion just before my 757 touched down, and we shot back into the air. This one was in foggy conditions when we lost separation: we couldn't even see the ground (we may have been hundreds of feet up), and I noticed we were banking off the approach path more than the climb. Coincidentally, my host had been asking me about flight abnormalities as she was taking me to the airport, and I basically said abnormal things don't happen that often.

If that's the case, then it wasn't loss of separation - the a/c on 28R is the trailing a/c (which has to maintain as the trailing a/c) and cannot overtake the one on the 28L approach. The two a/c are paired with the 28L a/c leading. If you're really bored, look up FAA Order 7110.308 for the specifics.

Interesting, thanks for the FAA reference. But isn't that a loss of separation issue? The FAA doc seems aimed at ensuring "separation" of AC arriving on close, parallel runways. (Not trying to be argumentative here, just curious and uninformed about technical or terminology specifics).

ditto at LCY :eek:^

I had a similar experience on an LH 747 a number of years ago coming into 28R at SFO. We initiated the go-around fairly early on, so I don't remember it being particularly dramatic (agree with the people who say "like a takeoff"). We got some nice views of SF as we circled to slot back in, and afterwards the pilot came on and blamed the aircraft landing on 28L. I was watching it out of the window, but I don't recall anything technical about it other than "that plane seems pretty close.."

...and the normal go-around thrust is NOT full go-around power. The auto-thrust only gives enough power for a 2000fpm climb. More power is available if it is needed.

Anyone know if the airline owes a fee to the airport operator for a go-around called by the pilot (vs commanded by the controller)? Or does it fall under the general landing fee(s)?

No fees for a go-around in the US.

Both of mine in NYC area.

One on PS landing in JFK 3 years ago - a JetBlue aircraft didn't clear the runway so we got the 757 rocket up.

The other landing in EWR this year in pretty rough crosswinds on a 777 from Europe. Were coming in really fast for the altitude and the whole approach seemed off. Sure enough we went around. That one was more jarring than the other.

I'm always curious about the frequency of go-arounds. Never been through one. Yet.

Thanks for posting that. Been on a few, and it really does feel like thrust is stronger.

Great video ^

I think now it would be the foreign carrier (that's what I think I saw) that would do go around.

Three go arounds for me, but I think I'll take three of them over aborted take-off or emergency landing @:-)

My feeling as well.

Yes, and go arounds feel different to me.

Took me YEARS of flying to get one, then two fairly close together, and none in last five year flying at least 1K miles a year.

had two in the past year or so:

SFO-BOS on a pmUA non-p.s. 757, "loss of glideslope indicator" (channel 9 was on throughout)
KWA-KSA on the island hopper, winds/visibility

both go-arounds were executed above 1000', so nothing dramatic (from my perspective). the muscle in the 757 is certainly impressive, and will be missed once they're all out of the fleet.

I've experienced one go-around and that was landing at ORD in February.

I remember looking out the window and going "hmmm...we seem to be coming in high and fast" when the pilot initiated about a half-mile out and took us a solid 30 miles to the North before making another approach.

I've wondered about that one because it just felt like our approach was "off".