Narrative:

I was PF into abq where ATIS said to expect the visual runway 26. ATIS winds were such that we could land on runway 8 with a 3-4 KT tailwind; so we requested it due to the high terrain east of the field and high number of unstable approachs reported on this runway. Unfortunately; ATC denied our request; so we set up for the visual runway 26 and configured early. I had WX radar selected; as there were thunderstorm cells in the area; and the captain monitored the high terrain using terrain mode. As we turned onto final for runway 26; tower reported a windshear alert with a gain of 25 KTS at the airfield. I elected to go around due to the windshear alert. During the go around tower informed another aircraft that they could try an approach to a different runway as the alert was not in effect there. We then asked if we could fly a visual approach to runway 21 which seemed to be clear of the windshear. It was agreed to and coordinated; and we were vectored on downwind for runway 21. Since runway 21 does not have an instrument approach; the captain attempted to load the visual in the FMS for runway 21; but was unable. We xferred aircraft control and I also tried with no success. At this time the captain was flying and we were vectored on downwind (when we had to deviate for more thunderstorm cells) and asked to call the airfield in sight. We called the airfield insight and were cleared visual approach runway 21. As we were about to turn inbound we got an aural terrain warning and as we started the CFIT maneuver; got a terrain ahead warning. All warnings ceased immediately after; and we continued and informed tower of our go around and asked to re-enter the pattern for runway 21. We then got vectors back around for another visual and landed on runway 21. I think there were many factors that contributed to our situation: thunderstorms; windshear; high terrain; night; unfamiliar with runways; changing runways; FMC difficulty and high workload. We should have turned in more quickly or stayed higher until we had the actual runway in sight versus just the runway environment. Supplemental information from acn 805228: we returned for a successful approach and landing on runway 21. Tower was very helpful on our 3RD approach to abq in turning up the runway lights for runway 21 as we aligned for the final approach. We were getting loaded up as a crew pretty quickly with night conditions in mountainous terrain; no instrument approachs to either runways 26 or 21 for increased situational awareness; thunderstorms near and in the pattern; a first time for both of us visual approach at night to both these runways and an FMS we were having difficulty programming with our workload. Basically we had to abandon the box to deviate from WX and fly the jet. I think I could have done a better job turning in a bit earlier. With our workload on the flight deck I think we handled it pretty well considering our conditions but am grateful for the onboard tool of egpws. I knew we had to be getting close due to our WX deviation of some terrain threats but that was too close for comfort. After that flight we were busy turning the aircraft and had some opportunity to review our performance en route; aom procedures and the system manual.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR FLT CREW EXPERIENCED A GPWS 'TERRAIN TERRAIN' WARNING ON NIGHT VISUAL APCH TO ABQ. THEY FOLLOWED CFIT ESCAPE PROCEDURES AND GOT VECTORS FOR ANOTHER VISUAL.

Narrative: I WAS PF INTO ABQ WHERE ATIS SAID TO EXPECT THE VISUAL RWY 26. ATIS WINDS WERE SUCH THAT WE COULD LAND ON RWY 8 WITH A 3-4 KT TAILWIND; SO WE REQUESTED IT DUE TO THE HIGH TERRAIN E OF THE FIELD AND HIGH NUMBER OF UNSTABLE APCHS RPTED ON THIS RWY. UNFORTUNATELY; ATC DENIED OUR REQUEST; SO WE SET UP FOR THE VISUAL RWY 26 AND CONFIGURED EARLY. I HAD WX RADAR SELECTED; AS THERE WERE TSTM CELLS IN THE AREA; AND THE CAPT MONITORED THE HIGH TERRAIN USING TERRAIN MODE. AS WE TURNED ONTO FINAL FOR RWY 26; TWR RPTED A WINDSHEAR ALERT WITH A GAIN OF 25 KTS AT THE AIRFIELD. I ELECTED TO GO AROUND DUE TO THE WINDSHEAR ALERT. DURING THE GAR TWR INFORMED ANOTHER ACFT THAT THEY COULD TRY AN APCH TO A DIFFERENT RWY AS THE ALERT WAS NOT IN EFFECT THERE. WE THEN ASKED IF WE COULD FLY A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 21 WHICH SEEMED TO BE CLR OF THE WINDSHEAR. IT WAS AGREED TO AND COORDINATED; AND WE WERE VECTORED ON DOWNWIND FOR RWY 21. SINCE RWY 21 DOES NOT HAVE AN INST APCH; THE CAPT ATTEMPTED TO LOAD THE VISUAL IN THE FMS FOR RWY 21; BUT WAS UNABLE. WE XFERRED ACFT CTL AND I ALSO TRIED WITH NO SUCCESS. AT THIS TIME THE CAPT WAS FLYING AND WE WERE VECTORED ON DOWNWIND (WHEN WE HAD TO DEVIATE FOR MORE TSTM CELLS) AND ASKED TO CALL THE AIRFIELD IN SIGHT. WE CALLED THE AIRFIELD INSIGHT AND WERE CLRED VISUAL APCH RWY 21. AS WE WERE ABOUT TO TURN INBOUND WE GOT AN AURAL TERRAIN WARNING AND AS WE STARTED THE CFIT MANEUVER; GOT A TERRAIN AHEAD WARNING. ALL WARNINGS CEASED IMMEDIATELY AFTER; AND WE CONTINUED AND INFORMED TWR OF OUR GAR AND ASKED TO RE-ENTER THE PATTERN FOR RWY 21. WE THEN GOT VECTORS BACK AROUND FOR ANOTHER VISUAL AND LANDED ON RWY 21. I THINK THERE WERE MANY FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO OUR SITUATION: TSTMS; WINDSHEAR; HIGH TERRAIN; NIGHT; UNFAMILIAR WITH RWYS; CHANGING RWYS; FMC DIFFICULTY AND HIGH WORKLOAD. WE SHOULD HAVE TURNED IN MORE QUICKLY OR STAYED HIGHER UNTIL WE HAD THE ACTUAL RWY IN SIGHT VERSUS JUST THE RWY ENVIRONMENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 805228: WE RETURNED FOR A SUCCESSFUL APCH AND LNDG ON RWY 21. TWR WAS VERY HELPFUL ON OUR 3RD APCH TO ABQ IN TURNING UP THE RWY LIGHTS FOR RWY 21 AS WE ALIGNED FOR THE FINAL APCH. WE WERE GETTING LOADED UP AS A CREW PRETTY QUICKLY WITH NIGHT CONDITIONS IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN; NO INST APCHS TO EITHER RWYS 26 OR 21 FOR INCREASED SITUATIONAL AWARENESS; TSTMS NEAR AND IN THE PATTERN; A FIRST TIME FOR BOTH OF US VISUAL APCH AT NIGHT TO BOTH THESE RWYS AND AN FMS WE WERE HAVING DIFFICULTY PROGRAMMING WITH OUR WORKLOAD. BASICALLY WE HAD TO ABANDON THE BOX TO DEVIATE FROM WX AND FLY THE JET. I THINK I COULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB TURNING IN A BIT EARLIER. WITH OUR WORKLOAD ON THE FLT DECK I THINK WE HANDLED IT PRETTY WELL CONSIDERING OUR CONDITIONS BUT AM GRATEFUL FOR THE ONBOARD TOOL OF EGPWS. I KNEW WE HAD TO BE GETTING CLOSE DUE TO OUR WX DEV OF SOME TERRAIN THREATS BUT THAT WAS TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT. AFTER THAT FLT WE WERE BUSY TURNING THE ACFT AND HAD SOME OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW OUR PERFORMANCE ENRTE; AOM PROCS AND THE SYS MANUAL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.