Narrative:

ILS runway 28L (GS inoperative) at pit. Descended to minimums. Ceiling and visibility much worse than reported. Accomplished go around at or prior to missed approach. Went around and followed tower instructions (runway heading, 3000 ft). Flew full ILS to runway 28L and landed. I view this approach as unsafe for the following reasons: 1) cleared for an ILS approach GS out and not a localizer approach. 2) zaiko was very weak and unreliable making timing making timing to missed approach unreliable. 3) approach is being flown over men and equipment to a displaced threshold of more than 3500 ft. 4) not told that other aircraft were going around that would give a pilot a heads-up alert. 5) the actual WX at field was much worse than the ATIS and was not given.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DC9-30 ATTEMPTED APCH ON RWY 28R NO GS. WX MUCH WORSE THAN RPTED. MADE GAR AND MADE SECOND APCH ON RWY 28L ALL AIDS OPERATIONAL. LAND OK. NO UPDATE ON ATIS OR THAT GS WAS OUT ON RWY 28R.

Narrative: ILS RWY 28L (GS INOP) AT PIT. DSNDED TO MINIMUMS. CEILING AND VISIBILITY MUCH WORSE THAN RPTED. ACCOMPLISHED GAR AT OR PRIOR TO MISSED APCH. WENT AROUND AND FOLLOWED TWR INSTRUCTIONS (RWY HEADING, 3000 FT). FLEW FULL ILS TO RWY 28L AND LANDED. I VIEW THIS APCH AS UNSAFE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) CLRED FOR AN ILS APCH GS OUT AND NOT A LOC APCH. 2) ZAIKO WAS VERY WEAK AND UNRELIABLE MAKING TIMING MAKING TIMING TO MISSED APCH UNRELIABLE. 3) APCH IS BEING FLOWN OVER MEN AND EQUIP TO A DISPLACED THRESHOLD OF MORE THAN 3500 FT. 4) NOT TOLD THAT OTHER ACFT WERE GOING AROUND THAT WOULD GIVE A PLT A HEADS-UP ALERT. 5) THE ACTUAL WX AT FIELD WAS MUCH WORSE THAN THE ATIS AND WAS NOT GIVEN.

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.