Narrative:

Leaving ZZZ2; we were assigned an aircraft that was non-RNAV. Heading between ZZZ2-ZZZ there were thunderstorms and we were able to navigate between vors and radar vectors. ZZZ approach control took our handoff and approximately 20 miles out we were advised that the previous arrival had reported a 30kt loss of airspeed on final. At this time I elected to slow the aircraft as the pilot flying. The captain (ca) and I discussed whether or not to continue; or to hold; or divert. Based on the information received from approach control we figured the aircraft had come in a while before us when there were still cells on or near the field. We were vectored onto final and cleared for the approach. At approximately 1700 ft MSL after intercepting the glideslope; the airspeed trended upward rapidly. We experienced about a 30kt gain and I decided that the threat of wind shear was still prevalent and decided a go around was our best option. I called for the go around and executed the go around. Approach control took our handoff and assigned vectors for us to make a plan of action. We requested delay vectors to the southwest to decide whether to divert or to hold for another approach. At this time we evaluated our alternates and with weather quickly deteriorating we decided to divert and found ZZZ1 to have the best weather. We contacted dispatch to have our alternate changed and executed the diversion. En route to ZZZ1 we continued to get bounced through cells and struggled with turbulence and precipitation. The rest of the flight proceeded with no other abnormalitiesafter our diversion from ZZZ and landing in ZZZ1. We contacted dispatch to decide whether to try to make it into ZZZ [intended destination] again. Our dispatcher said the weather looked good between ZZZ1-ZZZ. Having looked at a radar scope on my phone I saw weather between the two locations but believed we could make our way east to get to ZZZ. There was a hole around ZZZ in approximately 30 miles in all directions. Our dispatcher informed us there was no wind shear forecasted (we experienced wind shear on the first attempt into ZZZ and decided to divert to ZZZ1). Our dispatcher also had trouble clearly communicating and we felt hung out to dry. We looked into a good weather alternate in case we could not make it into ZZZ. ZZZ2 had good weather and that was our plan. Taking [off] with a non-RNAV aircraft we were able to take vectors to go around cells and approached ZZZ from the southeast. Lightning was all around us and we were in and out of moderate to heavy rain and light to moderate turbulence. I was increasingly worried that the weather was over ZZZ. Approach control took our hand off and told us of a wind shear alert on the 16R runway. It was a 20kt loss. We ask for holding vectors and evaluated whether or not we could get in or not. In discussion with approach they thought there was an opening from the south to land xxl and the winds were announced 310/7. We were informed cells were moving northeast and approximately 50mph. We were vectored a right then left south turn to get through a cell and right before turning on final approach informed us of a small precipitation area on a 2 mile final. By our radar depiction it seems tiny and light precipitation just inside the marker on the glideslope and at 190 knots we received a crew alerter 'windshear' I do not recall the color of the alert but I immediately rotated the aircraft and executed the go around and followed the wind shear guidance. Guidance lasted only a few seconds but it was apparent we were in an updraft associated with a cell. I asked for higher altitude and immediate vectors away. Approach advised us everything was available. I believe we initially took 6000 ft and a right turn 160. I think they ended up vectoring us into the storm however we continued around to a 210 heading and immediately declared our intention to divert. Once reconfigured and in a manageable workload the captain (ca) began to get a hold ofthe dispatcher and he was slow to respond. Approach and center controllers advised us of several airport's weather. We decided that our fuel was better served to go back to ZZZ1 where we knew what the weather was like and it was closer; giving us more fuel to evaluate. In trying to avoid cells with no RNAV I asked from FL210 and vectors through weather. ATC as well as our weather radar were worthless. We chased turbulence precipitation and lightning all the way to ZZZ1. Within 30 miles of ZZZ1 everything smoothed out and we completed the flight with no further issues. Both the ca and I felt the dispatcher was in over his head and was struggling to stay ahead of his required work. I believe there was pressure on him to launch and complete this flight. Other operations were also experiencing delays. Weather was obviously a threat. All people involved in working this flight felt pressure to complete the mission and I believe this lead to launching a flight was not meant to make it. Having a non-rnav aircraft made navigating difficult. We were really left to the opinions of ATC and I believe it left us to get bounced around more than necessary. A wind shear [alert] became apparent leading into ZZZ. I believe we handled it as safely as possible and our training lead to a safe outcome to the flight. I wish our dispatcher and us had come up with a plan to delay the flight until the weather would have moved out. However; I was up against a duty issue (we had 40 minutes to launch) I think this further pushed the idea to get the aircraft airborne which was a poor choice. I don't believe it will ever be necessary to launch a flight to 'beat the weather.' I have a lot more respect for thunderstorms and wind shear and will not operate a critical phase of flight in the vicinity of a thunderstorm.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: After diverting once for weather at intended destination an Embraer regional jet crew takes off again for the final destination airport after Dispatcher advises weather should remain clear for their arrival. Upon arriving into the terminal area the crew faces heavy rain; turbulence; and lightning and is forced to go-around on approach due to windshear warning. Crew diverts back to the original diversion point. Crew cites lack of assistance from dispatchers as well as a NON-RNAV equipped aircraft as contributing factors.

Narrative: Leaving ZZZ2; we were assigned an aircraft that was non-RNAV. Heading between ZZZ2-ZZZ there were thunderstorms and we were able to navigate between VORs and radar vectors. ZZZ approach control took our handoff and approximately 20 miles out we were advised that the previous arrival had reported a 30kt loss of airspeed on final. At this time I elected to slow the aircraft as the pilot flying. The Captain (CA) and I discussed whether or not to continue; or to hold; or divert. Based on the information received from approach control we figured the aircraft had come in a while before us when there were still cells on or near the field. We were vectored onto final and cleared for the approach. At approximately 1700 FT MSL after intercepting the glideslope; the airspeed trended upward rapidly. We experienced about a 30kt gain and I decided that the threat of wind shear was still prevalent and decided a go around was our best option. I called for the go around and executed the go around. Approach control took our handoff and assigned vectors for us to make a plan of action. We requested delay vectors to the southwest to decide whether to divert or to hold for another approach. At this time we evaluated our alternates and with weather quickly deteriorating we decided to divert and found ZZZ1 to have the best weather. We contacted dispatch to have our alternate changed and executed the diversion. En route to ZZZ1 we continued to get bounced through cells and struggled with turbulence and precipitation. The rest of the flight proceeded with no other abnormalitiesAfter our diversion from ZZZ and landing in ZZZ1. We contacted dispatch to decide whether to try to make it into ZZZ [intended destination] again. Our dispatcher said the weather looked good between ZZZ1-ZZZ. Having looked at a radar scope on my phone I saw weather between the two locations but believed we could make our way east to get to ZZZ. There was a hole around ZZZ in approximately 30 miles in all directions. Our dispatcher informed us there was no wind shear forecasted (we experienced wind shear on the first attempt into ZZZ and decided to divert to ZZZ1). Our dispatcher also had trouble clearly communicating and we felt hung out to dry. We looked into a good weather alternate in case we could not make it into ZZZ. ZZZ2 had good weather and that was our plan. Taking [off] with a NON-RNAV aircraft we were able to take vectors to go around cells and approached ZZZ from the southeast. Lightning was all around us and we were in and out of moderate to heavy rain and light to moderate turbulence. I was increasingly worried that the weather was over ZZZ. Approach control took our hand off and told us of a Wind Shear alert on the 16R runway. It was a 20kt loss. We ask for holding vectors and evaluated whether or not we could get in or not. In discussion with approach they thought there was an opening from the south to land XXL and the winds were announced 310/7. We were informed cells were moving northeast and approximately 50mph. We were vectored a right then left S turn to get through a cell and right before turning on final approach informed us of a small precipitation area on a 2 mile final. By our radar depiction it seems tiny and light precipitation Just inside the marker on the glideslope and at 190 knots we received a crew alerter 'WINDSHEAR' I do not recall the color of the alert but I immediately rotated the aircraft and executed the go around and followed the wind shear guidance. Guidance lasted only a few seconds but it was apparent we were in an updraft associated with a cell. I asked for higher altitude and immediate vectors away. Approach advised us everything was available. I believe we initially took 6000 FT and a right turn 160. I think they ended up vectoring us into the storm however we continued around to a 210 heading and immediately declared our intention to divert. Once reconfigured and in a manageable workload the Captain (CA) began to get a hold ofthe dispatcher and he was slow to respond. Approach and center controllers advised us of several airport's weather. We decided that our fuel was better served to go back to ZZZ1 where we knew what the weather was like and it was closer; giving us more fuel to evaluate. In trying to avoid cells with no RNAV I asked from FL210 and vectors through weather. ATC as well as our weather radar were worthless. We chased turbulence precipitation and lightning all the way to ZZZ1. Within 30 miles of ZZZ1 everything smoothed out and we completed the flight with no further issues. Both the CA and I felt the dispatcher was in over his head and was struggling to stay ahead of his required work. I believe there was pressure on him to launch and complete this flight. Other operations were also experiencing delays. Weather was obviously a threat. All people involved in working this flight felt pressure to complete the mission and I believe this lead to launching a flight was not meant to make it. Having a non-rnav aircraft made navigating difficult. We were really left to the opinions of ATC and I believe it left us to get bounced around more than necessary. A wind shear [alert] became apparent leading into ZZZ. I believe we handled it as safely as possible and our training lead to a safe outcome to the flight. I wish our dispatcher and us had come up with a plan to delay the flight until the weather would have moved out. However; I was up against a duty issue (we had 40 minutes to launch) I think this further pushed the idea to get the aircraft airborne which was a poor choice. I don't believe it will ever be necessary to launch a flight to 'beat the weather.' I have a lot more respect for thunderstorms and wind shear and will not operate a critical phase of flight in the vicinity of a thunderstorm.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.