Narrative:

We were cleared to descend via an arrival for a visual approach at the airport. We had decided to use the rnp approach as a way to get to a final approach fix and failed to realize it created an inverse video on our approach which caused us to be high. We were extended farther downwind the arrival to get down to altitude and then turned in and cleared for the visual. Approaching the final approach fix we switched to tower and got a low altitude alert from them and a correct altimeter setting. Approaching and crossing the final approach fix gear down was called and then flaps 5 but the gear wasn't put down. We got the audio cue for landing gear and then the gear was then set. At the same time we had an FMS speed change that bugged our speed at 200 kts. I overrode the thrust levers to keep them from advancing and changed to manual speeds to bug a lower speed. With the low altitude; the late gear; and the unknown reason for the speed change we were not in an appropriate stabilized approach at 1;000 ft. And decided to go missed. As we called the missed approach they were issuing a landing clearance and got stepped on during their response to us. We went to the appropriate heading but before we could call back and verify the new altitude we had gone above it by approximately 800 ft. Also during the go around insufficient pitch was used and during the transition of the flaps from 5 to 2 the flaps were over sped. We coordinated with tower to get on a heading and altitude and were vectored back onto the visual approach and landed without further incident. Failing to identify the inverse video of the arrival led to us becoming more distracted and more task saturated in a crucial phase of flight. An incorrect ATIS combined with being higher than planned on the descent caused us to be low on our final and to receive a low altitude alert from tower. While being distracted with our altitude my scan was insufficient and communication inadequate to commutate what I saw going on with our FMS speeds and to get appropriate gear down and flap settings. While on the missed approach poor communication with ATC didn't allow us to hear an assigned altitude causing us to blow past the altitude given. My inexperience with go a rounds caused me to focus more on a heading and altitude and my scan was insufficient to notice the over speeding of the flaps.better understanding and planning of an arrival that connects to an approach will the inverse video functions in the mcdu will allow us to be at appropriate altitudes on an arrival. Better communication with the pilot flying and pilot monitoring during unplanned incidences will allow for smoother and more accurate corrections. Better pilot knowledge with allow me to recognize unstable approaches or the beginning of such in a way that I can correct them before having to properly execute a go around. There were many little things that led up to a big decision to have to go around. Having the correct ATIS printed and reviewed and the arrival and approach appropriately briefed are little things that could have helped us be better focused on the approach. While on the missed approach my scan of the instruments needs to be better to make sure my speed does not increase as to over speed the flaps.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: E175 flight crew reported several errors that resulted in an unstabilized approach followed by a go around and an altitude deviation.

Narrative: We were cleared to descend via an arrival for a visual approach at the airport. We had decided to use the RNP approach as a way to get to a final approach fix and failed to realize it created an inverse video on our approach which caused us to be high. We were extended farther downwind the arrival to get down to altitude and then turned in and cleared for the visual. Approaching the final approach fix we switched to Tower and got a low altitude alert from them and a correct altimeter setting. Approaching and crossing the final approach fix gear down was called and then flaps 5 but the gear wasn't put down. We got the audio cue for landing gear and then the gear was then set. At the same time we had an FMS speed change that bugged our speed at 200 kts. I overrode the thrust levers to keep them from advancing and changed to manual speeds to bug a lower speed. With the low altitude; the late gear; and the unknown reason for the speed change we were not in an appropriate stabilized approach at 1;000 ft. and decided to go missed. As we called the missed approach they were issuing a landing clearance and got stepped on during their response to us. We went to the appropriate heading but before we could call back and verify the new altitude we had gone above it by approximately 800 ft. Also during the go around insufficient pitch was used and during the transition of the flaps from 5 to 2 the flaps were over sped. We coordinated with Tower to get on a heading and altitude and were vectored back onto the visual approach and landed without further incident. Failing to identify the inverse video of the arrival led to us becoming more distracted and more task saturated in a crucial phase of flight. An incorrect ATIS combined with being higher than planned on the descent caused us to be low on our final and to receive a low altitude alert from Tower. While being distracted with our altitude my scan was insufficient and communication inadequate to commutate what I saw going on with our FMS speeds and to get appropriate gear down and flap settings. While on the missed approach poor communication with ATC didn't allow us to hear an assigned altitude causing us to blow past the altitude given. My inexperience with go a rounds caused me to focus more on a heading and altitude and my scan was insufficient to notice the over speeding of the flaps.Better understanding and planning of an arrival that connects to an approach will the inverse video functions in the MCDU will allow us to be at appropriate altitudes on an arrival. Better communication with the Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring during unplanned incidences will allow for smoother and more accurate corrections. Better pilot knowledge with allow me to recognize unstable approaches or the beginning of such in a way that I can correct them before having to properly execute a go around. There were many little things that led up to a big decision to have to go around. Having the correct ATIS printed and reviewed and the arrival and approach appropriately briefed are little things that could have helped us be better focused on the approach. While on the missed approach my scan of the instruments needs to be better to make sure my speed does not increase as to over speed the flaps.

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.