Narrative:

I am new to the ATR-72 aircraft. This was my third day on line after finishing IOE. The ATR has somewhat different crosswind handling characteristics than my previous aircraft. We were cleared to land on runway 13R. The wind was reported at about 180 degrees at 18 kts gusting to 25 kts. During the approach; some other FMS equipped aircraft reported at 4000 ft; the wind strength was about 60 kts. As we descended to pattern altitude; the extreme wind variations caused the autopilot to disengage. I was having some difficulty keeping the approach stabilized; but with a lot of power and control inputs; I did maintain approach speed. As we got within about 200 ft of the runway; I realized that the control inputs and power changes were going to be much too excessive near the runway; and exceeded my comfort level. I stated 'go around;' and executed the maneuver according to company procedures. Task saturation by captain and first officer during go-around. Possibly also task saturation by controller; along with busy radios. Uncertainty in the cockpit about our assigned altitude. During the climb; the first officer asked me what altitude we were assigned. I realized that I had missed the altitude during all of the callouts to the pilot not flying during the go-around. I told the first officer to ask the controller again. The tower saw us going around and asked if it was due to the crosswind. The first officer was working the radios and replied in the affirmative. The tower issued us a heading and an altitude; and I began the turn and the climb. The first officer queried the controller and we got no response. At this time; we had 5000 ft in our selector window; which is the ILS published missed approach altitude. Since the approach began as an ILS; this was the appropriate value to be in the window. However; due to past experience; I know that the typical missed approach altitude assigned is 3000 ft. At this time we were approaching 3000 ft; so I slowed the climb in anticipation of leveling there. I am sure that the tower controller was busy trying to coordinate with approach. On the second and third calls; the controller re-issued us a heading; but no altitude. On about the fourth call to the controller; the first officer asked; 'did you want aircraft X at 3000 ft?' finally we received a response and the controller advised us; 'no; you were supposed to be at 2000 ft.' we descended back to 2000 ft. The tower then handed us off to approach; and approach cleared us back up through 3000 ft to 4000 ft. We flew an ILS to another runway; and landed without any further incident. I do not believe that any traffic conflict resulted in our deviation. We saw no one close to us on TCAS on the 6 mile scale. I think a contributing factor was my first officer's use of nonstandard phraseology. For example; when he asked for clarification for our altitude; he told the controller we were 'lookin' for altitude.' in the middle of the go-around; I had to instruct him to say; 'say again the altitude for aircraft X.' I stressed to him after flight the importance of standard phraseology; and also to keep his hand on the altitude selector knob until the correct altitude is in and verified by both crew members. Supplemental information from acn 816133: due to high crosswinds on the landing; the captain called for a 'go-around' for safety of flight. We were issued an altitude and a heading from ATC. I was able to set the heading but due to the high workload presented to me; I was unable to set the altitude. I called ATC several times and requested the controller repeat the altitude and received no response. The controller only repeated the heading to me. So we began climbing to the altitude on the missed approach procedure on the heading we were assigned until ATC called us to switch us to approach control; which we were then notified of the altitude deviation. When we called approach control they informed us to climb higher. We returned for another approach on another runway which was non eventful.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATR72 flight crew reports go-around due gusty crosswind conditions and does not hear Tower assigned missed approach altitude; which they exceed.

Narrative: I am new to the ATR-72 aircraft. This was my third day on line after finishing IOE. The ATR has somewhat different crosswind handling characteristics than my previous aircraft. We were cleared to land on Runway 13R. The wind was reported at about 180 degrees at 18 kts gusting to 25 kts. During the approach; some other FMS equipped aircraft reported at 4000 ft; the wind strength was about 60 kts. As we descended to pattern altitude; the extreme wind variations caused the autopilot to disengage. I was having some difficulty keeping the approach stabilized; but with a lot of power and control inputs; I did maintain approach speed. As we got within about 200 ft of the runway; I realized that the control inputs and power changes were going to be much too excessive near the runway; and exceeded my comfort level. I stated 'go around;' and executed the maneuver according to company procedures. Task saturation by Captain and First Officer during go-around. Possibly also task saturation by Controller; along with busy radios. Uncertainty in the cockpit about our assigned altitude. During the climb; the First Officer asked me what altitude we were assigned. I realized that I had missed the altitude during all of the callouts to the Pilot Not Flying during the go-around. I told the First Officer to ask the Controller again. The Tower saw us going around and asked if it was due to the crosswind. The First Officer was working the radios and replied in the affirmative. The Tower issued us a heading and an altitude; and I began the turn and the climb. The First Officer queried the Controller and we got no response. At this time; we had 5000 ft in our selector window; which is the ILS published missed approach altitude. Since the approach began as an ILS; this was the appropriate value to be in the window. However; due to past experience; I know that the typical missed approach altitude assigned is 3000 ft. At this time we were approaching 3000 ft; so I slowed the climb in anticipation of leveling there. I am sure that the Tower Controller was busy trying to coordinate with approach. On the second and third calls; the Controller re-issued us a heading; but no altitude. On about the fourth call to the Controller; the First Officer asked; 'Did you want Aircraft X at 3000 ft?' Finally we received a response and the Controller advised us; 'No; you were supposed to be at 2000 ft.' We descended back to 2000 ft. The Tower then handed us off to Approach; and Approach cleared us back up through 3000 ft to 4000 ft. We flew an ILS to another runway; and landed without any further incident. I do not believe that any traffic conflict resulted in our deviation. We saw no one close to us on TCAS on the 6 mile scale. I think a contributing factor was my First Officer's use of nonstandard phraseology. For example; when he asked for clarification for our altitude; he told the Controller we were 'lookin' for altitude.' In the middle of the go-around; I had to instruct him to say; 'Say again the altitude for Aircraft X.' I stressed to him after flight the importance of standard phraseology; and also to keep his hand on the altitude selector knob until the correct altitude is in and verified by both crew members. Supplemental information from ACN 816133: Due to high crosswinds on the landing; the Captain called for a 'go-around' for safety of flight. We were issued an altitude and a heading from ATC. I was able to set the heading but due to the high workload presented to me; I was unable to set the altitude. I called ATC several times and requested the Controller repeat the altitude and received no response. The Controller only repeated the heading to me. So we began climbing to the altitude on the missed approach procedure on the heading we were assigned until ATC called us to switch us to Approach Control; which we were then notified of the altitude deviation. When we called Approach Control they informed us to climb higher. We returned for another approach on another runway which was non eventful.

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.