Narrative:

In the process of conducting new hire first officer (first officer) initial operating experience (IOE) we were cleared for the visual approach to runway 18R in dfw. The IOE student was pilot flying (PF) and I was pilot monitoring (pm). I was verbally guiding and assisting IOE student in configuring for the approach and correcting several mistakes he was making along the way. Student was still not very timely in executing recommended configuration changes. As a result we ended up at 1;000 feet AGL being 3-5kts fast and full-scale deflection high on the electronic glideslope and VASI. I called '1;000 feet - unstable' but the student did not react. He was frozen-up and not reacting as expected. Couple of second later I repeated the '1;000 feet - unstable' call and as the student again did not respond I called 'go-around; flaps 2' and selected flaps 2. Then I called 'positive rate - gear up!' and selected gear up. Student finally contributed to the go-around by pressing the takeoff go around (toga) buttons. As he did not call for any lateral or vertical modes I announced and selected 'heading' and 'flch'.ATC instructed us to fly runway heading and maintain 2;000 feet. As we received that instruction we were already climbing out of 2;300 feet. I told tower controller we were 2;300 feet already and inquired if they would like us to descend back down to 2;000 feet. Tower controller instructed us to fly runway heading and maintain 3;000 feet. Both student and myself were task-saturated and scrambling to keep up with heading changes and instructions from ATC; FD & guidance panel configuration; and completing the go-around maneuver. As I was working hard to complete pm and at least half of the PF duties at the same time I did not notice that student was not leveling off at 3;000 feet. I became aware of that fact as we were passing through 3;200 feet and immediately advised student to correct altitude and descend to 3;000 feet. Student corrected promptly but by the time climbing trend was reversed we were around 3;300 feet before starting the descent to our assigned altitude of 3;000 feet. Within approximately 10-15 seconds we were back down to 3;000 feet and level. The remainder of the go-around and subsequent visual approach and landing were uneventful.during simulator training students should be exposed more to unplanned and unscripted go-around events so they can overcome the startle factor easier and be prepared for a go-around on any approach. I should have noticed the lack of a level off and intervened before crossing 3;000 feet. Perhaps I should have turned the auto pilot on earlier to assist with level off at proper altitude instead of allowing student to hand-fly most of the go-around after becoming clear that his performance was inadequate.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An EMB-175 flight crew reported overshooting their cleared altitude during a go-around that was executed because of an unstable approach flown by the new-hire First Officer.

Narrative: In the process of conducting New Hire First Officer (FO) Initial Operating Experience (IOE) we were cleared for the visual approach to Runway 18R in DFW. The IOE student was Pilot Flying (PF) and I was Pilot Monitoring (PM). I was verbally guiding and assisting IOE student in configuring for the approach and correcting several mistakes he was making along the way. Student was still not very timely in executing recommended configuration changes. As a result we ended up at 1;000 feet AGL being 3-5kts fast and full-scale deflection high on the electronic glideslope and VASI. I called '1;000 feet - UNSTABLE' but the student did not react. He was frozen-up and not reacting as expected. Couple of second later I repeated the '1;000 feet - UNSTABLE' call and as the student again did not respond I called 'Go-Around; Flaps 2' and selected flaps 2. Then I called 'Positive Rate - Gear Up!' and selected gear up. Student finally contributed to the Go-Around by pressing the Takeoff Go Around (TOGA) buttons. As he did not call for any lateral or vertical modes I announced and selected 'HDG' and 'FLCH'.ATC instructed us to fly runway heading and maintain 2;000 feet. As we received that instruction we were already climbing out of 2;300 feet. I told tower controller we were 2;300 feet already and inquired if they would like us to descend back down to 2;000 feet. Tower controller instructed us to fly runway heading and maintain 3;000 feet. Both student and myself were task-saturated and scrambling to keep up with heading changes and instructions from ATC; FD & Guidance Panel configuration; and completing the Go-Around maneuver. As I was working hard to complete PM and at least half of the PF duties at the same time I did not notice that student was not leveling off at 3;000 feet. I became aware of that fact as we were passing through 3;200 feet and immediately advised student to correct altitude and descend to 3;000 feet. Student corrected promptly but by the time climbing trend was reversed we were around 3;300 feet before starting the descent to our assigned altitude of 3;000 feet. Within approximately 10-15 seconds we were back down to 3;000 feet and level. The remainder of the Go-Around and subsequent visual approach and landing were uneventful.During simulator training students should be exposed more to unplanned and unscripted Go-Around events so they can overcome the startle factor easier and be prepared for a Go-Around on any approach. I should have noticed the lack of a level off and intervened before crossing 3;000 feet. Perhaps I should have turned the Auto Pilot on earlier to assist with level off at proper altitude instead of allowing student to hand-fly most of the Go-Around after becoming clear that his performance was inadequate.

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.