Narrative:

Before the top of descent; I reviewed the abq charts. Since I hadn't been to abq at night with a landing to the west in several years (or possibly longer); I again paid attention to the advisory pages. I didn't really see anything outstanding. I also looked to see if there was any RNAV approach to runway 26 in the chart book. I didn't see any to help in guidance. I was concerned about the strong westerly wind that would probably be present on downwind pushing our ground speed higher than our TAS as we approached the rising terrain east of the airport. I proceeded to brief a visual approach with emphasis on being down to a 1;500 ft pattern altitude (approximately 7;300 ft MSL) and slowed up to about 180 KTS on left downwind. We also both selected our 'terr on' pushbuttons to display terrain on our navigation display's (nd). When we checked in with approach; we were told to expect a visual approach to runway 26. We were also given an altitude assignment of 11;000 ft and a heading that would put us on a course to be about 5-6 miles south of the airport on downwind. That was further from the airport than I wanted to be; especially with the 20-30 KT tailwind we had at that altitude. As we got within about 8-10 miles of the midpoint of left downwind we were still at 11;000. We requested lower and were eventually given 9;000 ft. I felt we were still too high; considering where we could not go at this airport (i.e. No extended downwind to lose excess altitude). Due to our higher than expected altitude I had slowed to 180 KIAS and had gone to flaps 2. I also had the first officer tell approach control we had the airport in sight. We finally got clearance for a visual approach at 9;000 ft on downwind. I set 7;300 in the altitude window selected an open descent and deployed the speed brakes and slowed to 170 KIAS. I knew from past experience and the note in the advisory pages that I couldn't go much beyond 3 miles east of the approach end of the runway; so as we approached abeam that point on final; I turned north; retracted the speed brakes; called for gear down and flaps 3. I also selected 160 KIAS. I could see the lights of the terrain below us; not dense like city lights; but not sparse either. I thought we might be ok; but the green terrain on the nd was now turning amber at a fairly rapid pace. It was also closer to our location than I liked. At that point I began to think we very well could have to go around. I was about ready to angle a bit toward the approach end of the runway (a heading of 330-340 degrees) when we got one 'caution... Terrain' followed about 1 - 2 seconds later by 'whoop; whoop; pull up; terrain'. Although I could see the terrain; being dark; I immediately disconnected the autopilot and initiated a standard go-around. I also turned the aircraft directly toward the runway. We advised the tower that we had gone around due to a terrain warning. We were assigned 8;000 ft and arrived at that altitude in short order. We stayed at 210 KIAS and I re-engaged the autopilot. We were offered an approach to runway 3 or 8; but I felt the tailwind on final would exceed safe limits. We asked for and received another visual approach to runway 26 with our request to keep the downwind in tight to the airport. This time; everything worked out. As we rolled on to final approach; we were right on the PAPI glide slope just inside 3 miles from the runway; stable at 1;000 ft. This is where I wanted to be on the first approach; but felt how we had been vectored and held up high prevented us from being successful. After shutdown at the gate; I reviewed what had happened with my first officer. I was frustrated by having to go-around and felt I had been set up by the wide vector and late descent given by abq approach. I also knew a sim instructor was on board. I wanted to see if he had any insight into what had happened. He was one of the last off the aircraft and was more than willing to talk with us. He asked if we had done the RNAV to runway 26. I said I hadn't seen that approach. Plus; there is no mention of it in the books. Had I seen it (one way or the other); I would have selected this approach without hesitation. Had I selected this approach; I feel we would have been successful and would have had a safer operation. Right before we got the terrain warning; I was starting to feel that I was going into the yellow. We ended up higher on downwind and farther from the airport than planned due to the handling by abq approach. I never saw or heard another aircraft in our vicinity; so I don't know why approach was so reluctant to let us get closer to the airport at a lower altitude. And then I wasn't aware of the RNAV visual approach to runway 26. There is no mention of this in the advisory pages. Since this airport has such a chart and has high terrain in its eastern quadrant; being a 'special airport' seems to be a natural fit. [We should have conducted] a thorough search of all approach plates from front to back; especially at airports at night where I have not been in some time. I also think a night approach with strong winds out of the west might make for a good training spot in a future training cycle.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A319 Captain describes receiving a terrain warning during a night visual approach to Runway 26 at ABQ and executing a go around. The second approach is successful.

Narrative: Before the top of descent; I reviewed the ABQ charts. Since I hadn't been to ABQ at night with a landing to the west in several years (or possibly longer); I again paid attention to the advisory pages. I didn't really see anything outstanding. I also looked to see if there was any RNAV approach to Runway 26 in the chart book. I didn't see any to help in guidance. I was concerned about the strong westerly wind that would probably be present on downwind pushing our ground speed higher than our TAS as we approached the rising terrain east of the airport. I proceeded to brief a visual approach with emphasis on being down to a 1;500 FT pattern altitude (approximately 7;300 FT MSL) and slowed up to about 180 KTS on left downwind. We also both selected our 'TERR ON' pushbuttons to display terrain on our Navigation Display's (ND). When we checked in with Approach; we were told to expect a visual approach to Runway 26. We were also given an altitude assignment of 11;000 FT and a heading that would put us on a course to be about 5-6 miles south of the airport on downwind. That was further from the airport than I wanted to be; especially with the 20-30 KT tailwind we had at that altitude. As we got within about 8-10 miles of the midpoint of left downwind we were still at 11;000. We requested lower and were eventually given 9;000 FT. I felt we were still too high; considering where we could not go at this airport (i.e. no extended downwind to lose excess altitude). Due to our higher than expected altitude I had slowed to 180 KIAS and had gone to flaps 2. I also had the First Officer tell Approach Control we had the airport in sight. We finally got clearance for a visual approach at 9;000 FT on downwind. I set 7;300 in the altitude window selected an open descent and deployed the speed brakes and slowed to 170 KIAS. I knew from past experience and the note in the advisory pages that I couldn't go much beyond 3 miles east of the approach end of the runway; so as we approached abeam that point on final; I turned north; retracted the speed brakes; called for gear down and flaps 3. I also selected 160 KIAS. I could see the lights of the terrain below us; not dense like city lights; but not sparse either. I thought we might be OK; but the green terrain on the ND was now turning amber at a fairly rapid pace. It was also closer to our location than I liked. At that point I began to think we very well could have to go around. I was about ready to angle a bit toward the approach end of the runway (a heading of 330-340 degrees) when we got one 'caution... terrain' followed about 1 - 2 seconds later by 'whoop; whoop; pull up; terrain'. Although I could see the terrain; being dark; I immediately disconnected the autopilot and initiated a standard go-around. I also turned the aircraft directly toward the runway. We advised the Tower that we had gone around due to a terrain warning. We were assigned 8;000 FT and arrived at that altitude in short order. We stayed at 210 KIAS and I re-engaged the autopilot. We were offered an approach to Runway 3 or 8; but I felt the tailwind on final would exceed safe limits. We asked for and received another visual approach to Runway 26 with our request to keep the downwind in tight to the airport. This time; everything worked out. As we rolled on to final approach; we were right on the PAPI glide slope just inside 3 miles from the runway; stable at 1;000 FT. This is where I wanted to be on the first approach; but felt how we had been vectored and held up high prevented us from being successful. After shutdown at the gate; I reviewed what had happened with my First Officer. I was frustrated by having to go-around and felt I had been set up by the wide vector and late descent given by ABQ Approach. I also knew a Sim Instructor was on board. I wanted to see if he had any insight into what had happened. He was one of the last off the aircraft and was more than willing to talk with us. He asked if we had done the RNAV to Runway 26. I said I hadn't seen that approach. Plus; there is no mention of it in the books. Had I seen it (one way or the other); I would have selected this approach without hesitation. Had I selected this approach; I feel we would have been successful and would have had a safer operation. Right before we got the terrain warning; I was starting to feel that I was going into the yellow. We ended up higher on downwind and farther from the airport than planned due to the handling by ABQ Approach. I never saw or heard another aircraft in our vicinity; so I don't know why Approach was so reluctant to let us get closer to the airport at a lower altitude. And then I wasn't aware of the RNAV visual approach to Runway 26. There is no mention of this in the advisory pages. Since this airport has such a chart and has high terrain in its eastern quadrant; being a 'Special Airport' seems to be a natural fit. [We should have conducted] a thorough search of ALL approach plates from front to back; especially at airports at night where I have not been in some time. I also think a night approach with strong winds out of the west might make for a good training spot in a future training cycle.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.