Narrative:

The flight was the 5th for the new captain on his IOE pairing. I was the lca and the pilot not flying in the right seat. Night; the weather was 900 overcast with seven miles visibility. We were established on the oak runway 29 ILS; on tower frequency; inside mitoe just below 2;500 MSL. When the landing gear was lowered; we got a level 2 anti-skid right fail alert. The student captain initiated a go-around to trouble shoot the problem and I told the tower we were on the missed approach. By that time we were passing 3;200 MSL. The tower instructed us to maintain 2;000 and runway heading due to traffic as we were passing 3;500 in the climb. I reported our altitude and tower then assigned 3;000 and runway heading. I told tower we would descend to 3;000 and maintain runway heading. We did not receive any TCAS alerts; or hear anymore about traffic conflict.we had enough time that we could have coordinated the go-around better between the pilot flying and the pilot not flying; and then given the tower more heads up to de-conflict any possible traffic. The captain student had been briefed by me to be the captain and be decisive. He was cleared for the ILS and assumed that a landing without antiskid would be unsafe; and go-around via the published procedure was a correct response to trouble shoot the level 2 alert. In retrospect; we the crew could have taken a moment to both get on the same page; and also give the tower some heads up of our plan to go-around and trouble shoot our problem.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A new DC10-30 Captain obtaining IOE initiated an immediate go-around when confronted with an antiskid inop message upon extending the landing gear while about 2;500 AFE. The go around created a traffic conflict for ATC and a quick resolution of conflicting actual versus appropriate altitudes had to be made quickly.

Narrative: The flight was the 5th for the new Captain on his IOE pairing. I was the LCA and the pilot not flying in the right seat. Night; the weather was 900 overcast with seven miles visibility. We were established on the OAK Runway 29 ILS; on tower frequency; inside MITOE just below 2;500 MSL. When the landing gear was lowered; we got a level 2 Anti-skid R Fail alert. The student Captain initiated a go-around to trouble shoot the problem and I told the Tower we were on the missed approach. By that time we were passing 3;200 MSL. The Tower instructed us to maintain 2;000 and runway heading due to traffic as we were passing 3;500 in the climb. I reported our altitude and Tower then assigned 3;000 and runway heading. I told Tower we would descend to 3;000 and maintain runway heading. We did not receive any TCAS alerts; or hear anymore about traffic conflict.We had enough time that we could have coordinated the go-around better between the pilot flying and the pilot not flying; and then given the Tower more heads up to de-conflict any possible traffic. The Captain student had been briefed by me to be the Captain and be decisive. He was cleared for the ILS and assumed that a landing without antiskid would be unsafe; and go-around via the published procedure was a correct response to trouble shoot the level 2 alert. In retrospect; we the crew could have taken a moment to both get on the same page; and also give the Tower some heads up of our plan to go-around and trouble shoot our problem.

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.