Narrative:

As a new captain during my IOE arriving into chicago for a visual to runway 27L, I made a missed approach since I was unable to slow the aircraft to a stabilized speed by 500 ft. Onboard was an FAA inspector giving me an 'I check.' chicago approach brought us in for a straight-in visual approach at 250 KTS until adame 11.9 DME itsl for runway 27L. Told us to maintain 180 KTS until willt 6.1 DME itsl, then contact tower at willt. The first thing I did was lower the gear and call for the final descent checklist to create as much drag as possible to slow the aircraft. I started an immediate descent to capture the GS and brought the throttles to idle. Requested the line check airman, who was riding in the right seat, to extend the flaps at 'maximum rate' incrementally at each air carrier flap limiting speed while decelerating. Approaching 500 ft, I was 15 KTS above target airspeed. Since stabilized criteria is indicated airspeed within plus 10 KTS minus 5 KTS of target airspeed, I announced going around passing 500 ft. Although the rate of descent was not in excess of 1000 FPM, I was still 1 DOT high on the GS. I felt the go around, for reasons of safety, was prudent maneuver. PNF announced to tower we were going around. As we neared our leveloff altitude of 4000 ft, altitude capture was displayed in lower left corner of ADI. I called for clean maneuvering speed. PNF set the speed by rotating the speed knob on MCP to change the value in the IAS/mach indicator to 188 KTS. We had a gross weight card of 160000 pounds minimum maneuvering and landing reference speeds for that weight was 188 KTS with 157 KTS for flaps 1 degree. All of the above speeds provide at least 130% of the stall speed (a margin of safety at least 1.3 vs) at the depicted flap settings. As we leveled the last flaps, we retracted at clean maneuvering speed. Tower asked the reason for the go around and PNF said unstabilized approach. Tower immediately replied with 'slow to 180 KTS.' the PNF selected 180 KTS before I called for flaps 1 degree. The speed slowed a few KTS below 188 KTS. The PNF went to make a PA announcement to the passenger. The FAA inspector made a comment about us being slower than flaps-up speed and the flaps had not yet been extended. I immediately called for flaps 1 degree as we slowed to 180 KTS. The fact that the speed decreased a few KTS below 188 KTS clean maneuvering and the flaps had not been extended to flaps 1 degree is the reason I am writing this report. Following this go around, we were vectored back to intercept the GS outside willt. We continued a stabilized visual approach to runway 27L, landed smoothly in the touchdown zone and taxied to the gate. Prior to the first approach, the FAA inspector said it would have been a successful 'I check.' however, since the speed had decreased a few KTS below 188 KTS without flaps 1 degree selected after the leveloff following the missed approach, he could not give me a successful 'I check.' approach control had brought us closer than the airplane's ability to slow to a stabilized approach by 500 ft. Although I followed the 3 degree GS maximum rate deceleration, we were inside the distance required with the winds and environment on that day to allow me to slow the aircraft to a stabilized approach by 500 ft. Although our manual says if we are on the GS at wavie 14.9 itsl at 250 KTS, it would only take 6.2 NM for an initial deceleration distance of 12.3 DME, or approximately 3 mi inside of wavie. The aircraft should be stabilized at willt (no wind). Because we were just inside the estimated deceleration point, I felt I had a very good chance of slowing the aircraft. As a result, I continued the approach. However, when I saw the speed approach 5 KTS over the limit at the 500 ft point, I decided to go around. The PNF selecting 180 KTS before I called flaps 1 degree might have been avoided had he waited a few seconds for me to call for flaps before selecting the speed. However, I take full responsibility for what happened.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A NEW CAPT FLYING AN IOE RIDE WITH A CHK AIRMAN AND AN ACI ALLOWS THE ACFT TO SLOW BELOW MINIMUM MANEUVERING SPD WITH ZERO DEGS FLAPS AFTER A GAR AND LEVELOFF FOR ANOTHER APCH TO ORD, IL.

Narrative: AS A NEW CAPT DURING MY IOE ARRIVING INTO CHICAGO FOR A VISUAL TO RWY 27L, I MADE A MISSED APCH SINCE I WAS UNABLE TO SLOW THE ACFT TO A STABILIZED SPD BY 500 FT. ONBOARD WAS AN FAA INSPECTOR GIVING ME AN 'I CHK.' CHICAGO APCH BROUGHT US IN FOR A STRAIGHT-IN VISUAL APCH AT 250 KTS UNTIL ADAME 11.9 DME ITSL FOR RWY 27L. TOLD US TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS UNTIL WILLT 6.1 DME ITSL, THEN CONTACT TWR AT WILLT. THE FIRST THING I DID WAS LOWER THE GEAR AND CALL FOR THE FINAL DSCNT CHKLIST TO CREATE AS MUCH DRAG AS POSSIBLE TO SLOW THE ACFT. I STARTED AN IMMEDIATE DSCNT TO CAPTURE THE GS AND BROUGHT THE THROTTLES TO IDLE. REQUESTED THE LINE CHK AIRMAN, WHO WAS RIDING IN THE R SEAT, TO EXTEND THE FLAPS AT 'MAX RATE' INCREMENTALLY AT EACH ACR FLAP LIMITING SPD WHILE DECELERATING. APCHING 500 FT, I WAS 15 KTS ABOVE TARGET AIRSPD. SINCE STABILIZED CRITERIA IS INDICATED AIRSPD WITHIN PLUS 10 KTS MINUS 5 KTS OF TARGET AIRSPD, I ANNOUNCED GOING AROUND PASSING 500 FT. ALTHOUGH THE RATE OF DSCNT WAS NOT IN EXCESS OF 1000 FPM, I WAS STILL 1 DOT HIGH ON THE GS. I FELT THE GAR, FOR REASONS OF SAFETY, WAS PRUDENT MANEUVER. PNF ANNOUNCED TO TWR WE WERE GOING AROUND. AS WE NEARED OUR LEVELOFF ALT OF 4000 FT, ALT CAPTURE WAS DISPLAYED IN LOWER L CORNER OF ADI. I CALLED FOR CLEAN MANEUVERING SPD. PNF SET THE SPD BY ROTATING THE SPD KNOB ON MCP TO CHANGE THE VALUE IN THE IAS/MACH INDICATOR TO 188 KTS. WE HAD A GROSS WT CARD OF 160000 LBS MINIMUM MANEUVERING AND LNDG REF SPDS FOR THAT WT WAS 188 KTS WITH 157 KTS FOR FLAPS 1 DEG. ALL OF THE ABOVE SPDS PROVIDE AT LEAST 130% OF THE STALL SPD (A MARGIN OF SAFETY AT LEAST 1.3 VS) AT THE DEPICTED FLAP SETTINGS. AS WE LEVELED THE LAST FLAPS, WE RETRACTED AT CLEAN MANEUVERING SPD. TWR ASKED THE REASON FOR THE GAR AND PNF SAID UNSTABILIZED APCH. TWR IMMEDIATELY REPLIED WITH 'SLOW TO 180 KTS.' THE PNF SELECTED 180 KTS BEFORE I CALLED FOR FLAPS 1 DEG. THE SPD SLOWED A FEW KTS BELOW 188 KTS. THE PNF WENT TO MAKE A PA ANNOUNCEMENT TO THE PAX. THE FAA INSPECTOR MADE A COMMENT ABOUT US BEING SLOWER THAN FLAPS-UP SPD AND THE FLAPS HAD NOT YET BEEN EXTENDED. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED FOR FLAPS 1 DEG AS WE SLOWED TO 180 KTS. THE FACT THAT THE SPD DECREASED A FEW KTS BELOW 188 KTS CLEAN MANEUVERING AND THE FLAPS HAD NOT BEEN EXTENDED TO FLAPS 1 DEG IS THE REASON I AM WRITING THIS RPT. FOLLOWING THIS GAR, WE WERE VECTORED BACK TO INTERCEPT THE GS OUTSIDE WILLT. WE CONTINUED A STABILIZED VISUAL APCH TO RWY 27L, LANDED SMOOTHLY IN THE TOUCHDOWN ZONE AND TAXIED TO THE GATE. PRIOR TO THE FIRST APCH, THE FAA INSPECTOR SAID IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SUCCESSFUL 'I CHK.' HOWEVER, SINCE THE SPD HAD DECREASED A FEW KTS BELOW 188 KTS WITHOUT FLAPS 1 DEG SELECTED AFTER THE LEVELOFF FOLLOWING THE MISSED APCH, HE COULD NOT GIVE ME A SUCCESSFUL 'I CHK.' APCH CTL HAD BROUGHT US CLOSER THAN THE AIRPLANE'S ABILITY TO SLOW TO A STABILIZED APCH BY 500 FT. ALTHOUGH I FOLLOWED THE 3 DEG GS MAX RATE DECELERATION, WE WERE INSIDE THE DISTANCE REQUIRED WITH THE WINDS AND ENVIRONMENT ON THAT DAY TO ALLOW ME TO SLOW THE ACFT TO A STABILIZED APCH BY 500 FT. ALTHOUGH OUR MANUAL SAYS IF WE ARE ON THE GS AT WAVIE 14.9 ITSL AT 250 KTS, IT WOULD ONLY TAKE 6.2 NM FOR AN INITIAL DECELERATION DISTANCE OF 12.3 DME, OR APPROX 3 MI INSIDE OF WAVIE. THE ACFT SHOULD BE STABILIZED AT WILLT (NO WIND). BECAUSE WE WERE JUST INSIDE THE ESTIMATED DECELERATION POINT, I FELT I HAD A VERY GOOD CHANCE OF SLOWING THE ACFT. AS A RESULT, I CONTINUED THE APCH. HOWEVER, WHEN I SAW THE SPD APCH 5 KTS OVER THE LIMIT AT THE 500 FT POINT, I DECIDED TO GO AROUND. THE PNF SELECTING 180 KTS BEFORE I CALLED FLAPS 1 DEG MIGHT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED HAD HE WAITED A FEW SECONDS FOR ME TO CALL FOR FLAPS BEFORE SELECTING THE SPD. HOWEVER, I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT HAPPENED.

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.