Narrative:

During the ILS approach; the left landing gear did not indicate down and locked. After cycling the gear there was still no indication. Tower was informed that we would need to break off the approach due to a landing gear issue. I initiated a go-around and asked the pilot not flying to verify the initial altitude on the missed approach procedure. The initial altitude is 1;500 ft; so I began a climb to 1;500 ft and shortly after was advised by tower to fly runway heading at 1;000 ft. After establishing 1;000 ft on the runway heading we were given the clearance to fly the published missed. At the time we were given this clearance; we had flown down the runway and were now south of the missed approach point for the published missed. I selected long range navigation and ensured that the FMS had sequenced to the missed approach procedure when I had hit the togo button. The FMS was selected to the first fix and I continued to hand fly the aircraft using the flight director for guidance. When given the published missed I asked the pilot not flying what the altitude was for the missed and we set 3;000 ft in the altitude select. Since we were south of the airport now a right turn to the north/northeast was required to get back on course. During the flight to re-establish the proper course for the published procedure we were told to make an immediate decent to 2;000 ft; at which time I complied and also realized that we were only to be at 1;500 ft until the first fix and then up to 3;000 ft after it. After the decent to 2;000 ft the TRACON began giving vectors and we received two traffic advisories from the TRACON. We were in VMC and were ably to visually make contact with the aircraft. There was 1;000 ft vertical separation and no TCAS alerts sounded. Upon being able to investigate the landing gear issue; we discovered that one of the bulbs was inoperative in the left gear down indicator and the other bulb began to work when pushed. The one light bulb continued to work for the remainder of the flight. A second ILS was performed with no issues and I was told to call the TRACON. I called and was advised to call the manager of quality assurance in the morning since I had caused a 'loss of separation.' I spoke with my chief pilot after these conversations to alert the company of the incident. I called the next morning and was advised by the quality assurance manager that a report is automatically generated and sent to the regional FSDO and then sent on to the overseeing FSDO of the operator. Obviously equipment malfunctions cause a distraction in the cockpit which adds to the workload and complicates matters. Receiving a clearance that is not expected and then having it changed after flying passed the missed approach point complicates matters further. In the event of a missed approach with a possible equipment malfunction it is best to state that one is going missed and will perform the published missed. If given something different by the tower; the tower should be able to give vectors and altitude guidance away from the traffic area. In our case we were expecting to land in VMC conditions and had not planned to go-around. When the situation developed to a go-around we expected the published missed. When not given the published missed; we expected vectors; but was then put back on the published missed after flying well beyond the missed approach point. We were required to make unplanned turns back to the missed approach course and during the confusion and distraction of a gear malfunction failed to set the proper altitude in the altitude select. Had we flown the published missed from the beginning; we would have been on course in a safe area that the altitude deviation would not have caused a 'loss of separation' at TRACON. Unfortunately; the tower gave us runway heading long enough that we had to turn through the course of arrivals to get back on the published missed. In the end what seems to be best is to always plan for a missed approach even in VMC conditions and always plan to do the published missed. When calling tower to go around; state that the published missed will be flown and require ATC to provide heading and altitude guidance if they require anything other than the published missed.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CE680 left landing gear did not indicate down on approach. A missed approach was executed; but the crew climbed to 3;000 FT with an initial level off altitude of 2;500 FT and caused a conflict with a nearby airport's inbound traffic.

Narrative: During the ILS approach; the left landing gear did not indicate down and locked. After cycling the gear there was still no indication. Tower was informed that we would need to break off the approach due to a landing gear issue. I initiated a go-around and asked the pilot not flying to verify the initial altitude on the missed approach procedure. The initial altitude is 1;500 FT; so I began a climb to 1;500 FT and shortly after was advised by Tower to fly runway heading at 1;000 FT. After establishing 1;000 FT on the runway heading we were given the clearance to fly the published missed. At the time we were given this clearance; we had flown down the runway and were now south of the missed approach point for the published missed. I selected long range navigation and ensured that the FMS had sequenced to the missed approach procedure when I had hit the TOGO button. The FMS was selected to the first fix and I continued to hand fly the aircraft using the flight director for guidance. When given the published missed I asked the pilot not flying what the altitude was for the missed and we set 3;000 FT in the altitude select. Since we were south of the airport now a right turn to the north/northeast was required to get back on course. During the flight to re-establish the proper course for the published procedure we were told to make an immediate decent to 2;000 FT; at which time I complied and also realized that we were only to be at 1;500 FT until the first fix and then up to 3;000 FT after it. After the decent to 2;000 FT the TRACON began giving vectors and we received two traffic advisories from the TRACON. We were in VMC and were ably to visually make contact with the aircraft. There was 1;000 FT vertical separation and no TCAS alerts sounded. Upon being able to investigate the landing gear issue; we discovered that one of the bulbs was inoperative in the left gear down indicator and the other bulb began to work when pushed. The one light bulb continued to work for the remainder of the flight. A second ILS was performed with no issues and I was told to call the TRACON. I called and was advised to call the Manager of Quality Assurance in the morning since I had caused a 'loss of separation.' I spoke with my Chief Pilot after these conversations to alert the Company of the incident. I called the next morning and was advised by the Quality Assurance Manager that a report is automatically generated and sent to the Regional FSDO and then sent on to the overseeing FSDO of the operator. Obviously equipment malfunctions cause a distraction in the cockpit which adds to the workload and complicates matters. Receiving a clearance that is not expected and then having it changed after flying passed the missed approach point complicates matters further. In the event of a missed approach with a possible equipment malfunction it is best to state that one is going missed and will perform the published missed. If given something different by the Tower; the Tower should be able to give vectors and altitude guidance away from the traffic area. In our case we were expecting to land in VMC conditions and had not planned to go-around. When the situation developed to a go-around we expected the published missed. When not given the published missed; we expected vectors; but was then put back on the published missed after flying well beyond the missed approach point. We were required to make unplanned turns back to the missed approach course and during the confusion and distraction of a gear malfunction failed to set the proper altitude in the altitude select. Had we flown the published missed from the beginning; we would have been on course in a safe area that the altitude deviation would not have caused a 'loss of separation' at TRACON. Unfortunately; the Tower gave us runway heading long enough that we had to turn through the course of arrivals to get back on the published missed. In the end what seems to be best is to always plan for a missed approach even in VMC conditions and always plan to do the published missed. When calling Tower to go around; state that the published missed will be flown and require ATC to provide heading and altitude guidance if they require anything other than the published missed.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.