Narrative:

Upon arriving at decision ht, we executed a go around. I announced this to the tower, and I was acknowledged. Having received no other instructions, we executed the published missed approach. Climbing through 2000 ft I queried tower as to whether they wanted us to go to departure control. At that time, we were given a frequency for departure control, followed quickly by instructions to turn right, followed quickly by instructions to turn further to the right 310 degrees. I asked if we were still to go to departure control, and we were turned over then. When we got to departure, we were queried as to whether we had been given the departure instructions, at which time we responded that we had not. Then we were told by departure control that we should have asked for specific missed approach procedures. This was to preclude us from interfering with sfo traffic. During the next approach, we asked for and received specific missed approach procedures. I have a concern with approach control expecting pilots to request specific instructions for missed approach. Perhaps in the bay area it does have its place. But then one wonders what purpose the published missed approach serves, and especially the ramifications of a lost communications scenario with a missed approach. Callback conversation with the TRACON revealed the following information: analyst was unable to reach the reporter, but a call was made to the TRACON to verify the missed approach procedure. A specialist confirmed that missed approach instructions are given to the tower when they call that a missed approach has occurred. If no traffic is a factor the flight may fly the published missed approach vice a specific missed approach.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR CAPT OF MLG EXECUTED A MISSED APCH AT OAK RWY 29 DUE TO WX, AND ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED NO SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS. RPTR FLEW THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH, BUT ON DEP FREQ FLC WAS ADVISED THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD SPECIFIC MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS FROM TWR.

Narrative: UPON ARRIVING AT DECISION HT, WE EXECUTED A GAR. I ANNOUNCED THIS TO THE TWR, AND I WAS ACKNOWLEDGED. HAVING RECEIVED NO OTHER INSTRUCTIONS, WE EXECUTED THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH. CLBING THROUGH 2000 FT I QUERIED TWR AS TO WHETHER THEY WANTED US TO GO TO DEP CTL. AT THAT TIME, WE WERE GIVEN A FREQ FOR DEP CTL, FOLLOWED QUICKLY BY INSTRUCTIONS TO TURN R, FOLLOWED QUICKLY BY INSTRUCTIONS TO TURN FURTHER TO THE R 310 DEGS. I ASKED IF WE WERE STILL TO GO TO DEP CTL, AND WE WERE TURNED OVER THEN. WHEN WE GOT TO DEP, WE WERE QUERIED AS TO WHETHER WE HAD BEEN GIVEN THE DEP INSTRUCTIONS, AT WHICH TIME WE RESPONDED THAT WE HAD NOT. THEN WE WERE TOLD BY DEP CTL THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED FOR SPECIFIC MISSED APCH PROCS. THIS WAS TO PRECLUDE US FROM INTERFERING WITH SFO TFC. DURING THE NEXT APCH, WE ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED SPECIFIC MISSED APCH PROCS. I HAVE A CONCERN WITH APCH CTL EXPECTING PLTS TO REQUEST SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MISSED APCH. PERHAPS IN THE BAY AREA IT DOES HAVE ITS PLACE. BUT THEN ONE WONDERS WHAT PURPOSE THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH SERVES, AND ESPECIALLY THE RAMIFICATIONS OF A LOST COMS SCENARIO WITH A MISSED APCH. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH THE TRACON REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: ANALYST WAS UNABLE TO REACH THE RPTR, BUT A CALL WAS MADE TO THE TRACON TO VERIFY THE MISSED APCH PROC. A SPECIALIST CONFIRMED THAT MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN TO THE TWR WHEN THEY CALL THAT A MISSED APCH HAS OCCURRED. IF NO TFC IS A FACTOR THE FLT MAY FLY THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH VICE A SPECIFIC MISSED APCH.

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.