Narrative:

During approach to ZZZ; ATC advised of moderate to severe WX returns on or near our approach path. We were IMC; and experiencing light precipitation and light chop. There was no lightning visible during the entire event. Radar returns did not indicate severe WX on our flight path; however; the WX returns were just west of our final approach path. Even though ATC repeatedly advised us of the severe WX visible on or near our approach; we continued due to our relatively smooth and uneventful approach. We were the first aircraft on the final (no PIREPS from any aircraft ahead of us). Several times during the approach; the captain and I discussed our willingness to go around if anything made us uncomfortable. At approximately 1000 ft AGL we were not stable (airspeed 40 KTS too high) and we both agreed on a go around. During the go around we experienced significant windshear (airspeed gain of approximately 40 KTS); and most likely oversped the flaps by 10-15 KTS. (Overspeed entered in logbook). The go around was not pretty due to windshear; and low altitude capture; but aircraft was under positive control. We were slow to retract flaps due to high workload associated with windshear and climbing-turning; go around maneuver. Was fatigue a factor? Probably; due to our circadian rhythm shifts. We were launched as a standby crew; and then given a minimum layover (9 hours). This was followed by flight during a time when I would normally be sleeping. All of this can have a subtle effect on your better judgement. Bottom line: we should have broken off the approach earlier. There were plenty of hints that continuing wasn't a great idea. ATC; our radar and our gut were all in agreement; but for some reason we continued. We had plenty of gas; and we were not in a hurry. Next time; holding will be my plan of action.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 FLT CREW ENCOUNTERS WINDSHEAR ON FINAL APCH TO ZZZ AND EXECUTES A GAR.

Narrative: DURING APCH TO ZZZ; ATC ADVISED OF MODERATE TO SEVERE WX RETURNS ON OR NEAR OUR APCH PATH. WE WERE IMC; AND EXPERIENCING LIGHT PRECIP AND LIGHT CHOP. THERE WAS NO LIGHTNING VISIBLE DURING THE ENTIRE EVENT. RADAR RETURNS DID NOT INDICATE SEVERE WX ON OUR FLT PATH; HOWEVER; THE WX RETURNS WERE JUST W OF OUR FINAL APCH PATH. EVEN THOUGH ATC REPEATEDLY ADVISED US OF THE SEVERE WX VISIBLE ON OR NEAR OUR APCH; WE CONTINUED DUE TO OUR RELATIVELY SMOOTH AND UNEVENTFUL APCH. WE WERE THE FIRST ACFT ON THE FINAL (NO PIREPS FROM ANY ACFT AHEAD OF US). SEVERAL TIMES DURING THE APCH; THE CAPT AND I DISCUSSED OUR WILLINGNESS TO GO AROUND IF ANYTHING MADE US UNCOMFORTABLE. AT APPROX 1000 FT AGL WE WERE NOT STABLE (AIRSPD 40 KTS TOO HIGH) AND WE BOTH AGREED ON A GAR. DURING THE GAR WE EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT WINDSHEAR (AIRSPD GAIN OF APPROX 40 KTS); AND MOST LIKELY OVERSPED THE FLAPS BY 10-15 KTS. (OVERSPEED ENTERED IN LOGBOOK). THE GAR WAS NOT PRETTY DUE TO WINDSHEAR; AND LOW ALT CAPTURE; BUT ACFT WAS UNDER POSITIVE CTL. WE WERE SLOW TO RETRACT FLAPS DUE TO HIGH WORKLOAD ASSOCIATED WITH WINDSHEAR AND CLBING-TURNING; GAR MANEUVER. WAS FATIGUE A FACTOR? PROBABLY; DUE TO OUR CIRCADIAN RHYTHM SHIFTS. WE WERE LAUNCHED AS A STANDBY CREW; AND THEN GIVEN A MINIMUM LAYOVER (9 HRS). THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY FLT DURING A TIME WHEN I WOULD NORMALLY BE SLEEPING. ALL OF THIS CAN HAVE A SUBTLE EFFECT ON YOUR BETTER JUDGEMENT. BOTTOM LINE: WE SHOULD HAVE BROKEN OFF THE APCH EARLIER. THERE WERE PLENTY OF HINTS THAT CONTINUING WASN'T A GREAT IDEA. ATC; OUR RADAR AND OUR GUT WERE ALL IN AGREEMENT; BUT FOR SOME REASON WE CONTINUED. WE HAD PLENTY OF GAS; AND WE WERE NOT IN A HURRY. NEXT TIME; HOLDING WILL BE MY PLAN OF ACTION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.