Narrative:

Bay approach turned us in too close behind a slower aircraft. They kept asking us to slow down when we were already as slow as possible. I was busy trying to see the aircraft in the rain that we were overtaking; and also trying to keep the airspeed under control as the autothrottles were unable to maintain speed through the wind stream. I made a missed approach when the aircraft ahead failed to clear the runway. I did not hear the clearance to maintain runway heading and instead flew the published missed approach. I did not realize my mistake until I said 'don't we need to maintain 1900 ft.' both the inspector and copilot then said no we're cleared to 4000 ft. About the same instant, back on bay, the controller asked what heading we were assigned. I told him that I was flying the published missed approach. It would help if the published missed approach was the same as that one would receive from the tower. Straight ahead to oronn, on gilro it seems would make sense. Also, when landing south at all of the bay area airports, neither the pilots nor controllers are familiar with the circumstances. Therefore, the interim between aircraft should be increased. I think that all of the chatter about our 40 KT closing speed, plus the widebody transport at the moment will not track a VOR, and the autothrottles would not handle the windshear caused me to not hear the change in our clearance. Neither the inspector nor the copilot said anything when I started the left tear drop turn that is published. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information. A line check airman was aboard as well as 2 fos. None of them bothered to tell the reporting captain that he had a vector heading vice the published missed approach procedure. The captain just plain didn't hear the missed approach instructions as he was fighting the phenomenal low weight performance of his widebody transport aircraft. The FAA has not contacted him about this incident. The reporter strongly wishes that approach would use the published procedures instead of changing them at a very critical time of flight. The reporter states that he will not use the automatic go around feature in this aircraft again because of the excessively high performance that this gives when climbing to a very few hundred ft.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR WDB DID NOT FOLLOW ATC INSTRUCTIONS ON A MISSED APCH, THEY ATTEMPTED TO FOLLOW THE PUBLISHED PROCS.

Narrative: BAY APCH TURNED US IN TOO CLOSE BEHIND A SLOWER ACFT. THEY KEPT ASKING US TO SLOW DOWN WHEN WE WERE ALREADY AS SLOW AS POSSIBLE. I WAS BUSY TRYING TO SEE THE ACFT IN THE RAIN THAT WE WERE OVERTAKING; AND ALSO TRYING TO KEEP THE AIRSPD UNDER CTL AS THE AUTOTHROTTLES WERE UNABLE TO MAINTAIN SPD THROUGH THE WIND STREAM. I MADE A MISSED APCH WHEN THE ACFT AHEAD FAILED TO CLR THE RWY. I DID NOT HEAR THE CLRNC TO MAINTAIN RWY HDG AND INSTEAD FLEW THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH. I DID NOT REALIZE MY MISTAKE UNTIL I SAID 'DON'T WE NEED TO MAINTAIN 1900 FT.' BOTH THE INSPECTOR AND COPLT THEN SAID NO WE'RE CLRED TO 4000 FT. ABOUT THE SAME INSTANT, BACK ON BAY, THE CTLR ASKED WHAT HDG WE WERE ASSIGNED. I TOLD HIM THAT I WAS FLYING THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH. IT WOULD HELP IF THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH WAS THE SAME AS THAT ONE WOULD RECEIVE FROM THE TWR. STRAIGHT AHEAD TO ORONN, ON GILRO IT SEEMS WOULD MAKE SENSE. ALSO, WHEN LNDG S AT ALL OF THE BAY AREA ARPTS, NEITHER THE PLTS NOR CTLRS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES. THEREFORE, THE INTERIM BTWN ACFT SHOULD BE INCREASED. I THINK THAT ALL OF THE CHATTER ABOUT OUR 40 KT CLOSING SPD, PLUS THE WDB AT THE MOMENT WILL NOT TRACK A VOR, AND THE AUTOTHROTTLES WOULD NOT HANDLE THE WINDSHEAR CAUSED ME TO NOT HEAR THE CHANGE IN OUR CLRNC. NEITHER THE INSPECTOR NOR THE COPLT SAID ANYTHING WHEN I STARTED THE L TEAR DROP TURN THAT IS PUBLISHED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO. A LINE CHK AIRMAN WAS ABOARD AS WELL AS 2 FOS. NONE OF THEM BOTHERED TO TELL THE RPTING CAPT THAT HE HAD A VECTOR HDG VICE THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH PROC. THE CAPT JUST PLAIN DIDN'T HEAR THE MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS AS HE WAS FIGHTING THE PHENOMENAL LOW WT PERFORMANCE OF HIS WDB ACFT. THE FAA HAS NOT CONTACTED HIM ABOUT THIS INCIDENT. THE RPTR STRONGLY WISHES THAT APCH WOULD USE THE PUBLISHED PROCS INSTEAD OF CHANGING THEM AT A VERY CRITICAL TIME OF FLT. THE RPTR STATES THAT HE WILL NOT USE THE AUTOMATIC GAR FEATURE IN THIS ACFT AGAIN BECAUSE OF THE EXCESSIVELY HIGH PERFORMANCE THAT THIS GIVES WHEN CLBING TO A VERY FEW HUNDRED FT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.