mo32a

I understand completely. The simple part was from a "loss of separation" viewpoint, not that the go around was without risks.

Wow, quite the little bitxh fest. If you are VMC there is no separation minimum a controller has to adhere to other than both aircraft shouldn't be on the runway at the same time. If you did happen to overshoot with another aircraft just lifting off you would be assigned a diverging heading to fly. Pretty simple. I don't know what is going on in YYZ but all I can say all the newer controllers are much more risk aversive than previous generations. 2.1 Separation of an Arriving Aircraft from a Preceding Aircraft An arriving aircraft shall be separated from a preceding aircraft using the same runway by ensuring that the arriving aircraft does not cross the landing threshold until one of the following conditions exists: (a) the preceding aircraft has landed and taxied off the runway; (b) the preceding aircraft has landed or is over the landing runway and: (i) is at a distance from the threshold sufficient to allow the arriving aircraft to complete its landing roll without jeopardizing safety, and (ii) the arriving aircraft is advised of the preceding aircraft's position and intentions; (c) the preceding aircraft is airborne and: (i) is at a sufficient distance from the threshold that the arriving aircraft will not overtake it during the landing roll or conflict with it in the event of a missed approach, or (ii) has turned to avoid any conflict with the arriving aircraft in the event of a missed approach.

In BC we have a carbon tax. If the government was serious about reducing our carbon footprint they would give us free hydro produced electricity and encourage us by subsidy to get rid of our natural gas furnaces, water heaters and stoves etc. They most certainly are not doing that. They raise the electricity rates after you go over a very low threshold. The government, any government, is not interested in lowering your carbon footprint they are interested in getting more of your money.

I disagree. A go around because somebody was slow clearing or spacing was compromised is one thing. If in this case the aircraft had continued to land there would have been a very serious incident. Any controller would report this to his supervisor and a report would be generated.

I lost a bunch of dough investing in Railpower electric trains touted as the next big thing to move train cars around the yard.

The ILS for 28R was functioning when this occurred.

How many times has this route been flown successfully with no go around? Is it a known "fatigue" flight? How many other carriers successfully fly this approach? What duty time do other carriers have that make them less "fatigued"?

Stop issuing Narcan to everybody and the "crisis" will take care of itself.

From the topic title I assumed WJ was rewarding a privacy breech.

^And maybe not then.

There was a set of air stairs at the forward doors. This was AT looking to save $$. Should be a good lesson to folks to fly with mainline carriers.

The offset approach is corrected at 4 miles final, they were much closer than that. In fact with 28L out of service and a visual approach there was no need for them to be offset at all. I would think even if you are doing a visual you would tune the ILS up and see immediately that you weren't where you were supposed to be.

Well I'm a man but I identify as a woman, but I'm a lesbian. I'm having a great time.

Easy fix is to install a blast fence but a local official said they won't do anything because it has become tourist attraction.

I agree with UD. Two pilots screwed up, end of story. Rush out the fatigue agenda. If they were too tired to perform their duties they shouldn't have been flying.