Why Pilots Abort Landings at the Last Second — And What You’re Never Told

Understanding Why Pilots Abort Landings

You’re 30 seconds from touchdown. The runway is visible through the window. You can almost feel the relief of being back on the ground after hours in the air.

Then the engines roar to full power. The nose pitches up sharply. Your stomach drops as the plane climbs away from the runway you were about to land on.

The announcement crackles: “Ladies and gentlemen, we’re going around. We’ll be making another approach.”

That’s it. No explanation. No reassurance. Just those words while your mind races through every catastrophic scenario you’ve ever imagined.

Here’s what you were never told: That terrifying moment wasn’t a near-miss or a pilot error. It was the aviation system working exactly as designed — and the trigger might have been something neither you nor your pilot could see.

I’m an FAA electronics engineer who maintains the ground systems that guide aircraft to the runway. For 24 years, I’ve been the guy monitoring the equipment on the ground while you’re approaching from the air. I’ve watched hundreds of go-arounds triggered by systems passengers don’t know exist, for reasons that would actually make you feel safer if someone bothered to explain them.

Let me show you what’s really happening when planes abort landings at the last second — and why it’s one of the best safety features in aviation.

What Passengers Think Is Happening (And Why It’s Terrifying)

When a go-around happens, your brain fills the information void with worst-case scenarios:

“We almost hit another plane.” You picture two aircraft on a collision course, separated by mere feet.

“The pilot made a mistake.” Maybe they misjudged the approach. Maybe they weren’t aligned properly. Maybe they panicked.

“Something’s wrong with the plane.” An engine problem. A mechanical failure. Something serious enough that landing isn’t safe.

“The weather turned dangerous.” Sudden wind shear. Unexpected turbulence. Conditions too severe to land.

None of these is usually true. But without information, your mind gravitates toward disaster.

This is the reality gap in aviation: Pilots and air traffic controllers know exactly why a go-around was initiated. The systems on the ground captured the specific trigger. But passengers? They get eight words and no context.

Why Do Planes Abort Landings? The Answer Is More Boring (And Reassuring) Than You Think

Here’s the simple truth: Go-arounds are normal, routine, and one of the safest decisions a pilot can make.

In fact, the FAA considers a go-around to be just another phase of flight — not an emergency, not a failure, not even particularly noteworthy. It’s literally part of standard pilot training. Every pilot practices go-arounds repeatedly because they’re expected to happen.

But why do they happen? Most passengers assume it’s always something dramatic. The reality is far more mundane.

A go-around is triggered any time continuing the approach violates a safety parameter — and those parameters are deliberately conservative. The system is designed to say “not quite right, let’s try again” rather than “close enough, hope for the best.”

Think of it like this: If you were walking across a crosswalk and saw a car approaching faster than expected, you’d step back to the curb and wait for the next light. You wouldn’t call that a near-death experience. You’d call it being appropriately cautious.

That’s a go-around. The aviation equivalent of “let’s wait for better conditions.”

The Ground Systems You Never See (But That Keep You Safe)

Here’s where my perspective as a ground systems engineer comes in. Most passengers — and even many pilots — don’t realize how much of the go-around decision is driven by equipment on the ground.

When your plane is on final approach, it’s not just the pilot flying the aircraft. There’s an entire infrastructure of ground-based systems monitoring the approach path, the runway environment, and the electronic signals guiding the plane.

I maintain and work with these systems:

Instrument Landing System (ILS) — Creates an electronic glide path and centerline for the aircraft to follow. The localizer keeps you aligned with the runway; the glideslope keeps you at the correct descent angle.

Far Field Monitor (FFM) — Continuously checks that the ILS signals are accurate and that nothing has entered the protected critical area around the antenna.

Runway Visual Range (RVR) sensors — Measure visibility along the runway using forward scatter technology, telling pilots and controllers exactly how far they can see.

Approach lighting systems — High-intensity lights that create a visual path to the runway threshold, especially critical in low visibility.

Wind shear detection systems — Alert controllers and pilots to sudden wind changes that could affect the approach.

All of these systems have specific thresholds. When a threshold is crossed, the system generates an alert. And sometimes that alert means “this approach needs to stop.”

From my console, I can see exactly what triggered a go-around. From your seat, you’ll never know.

The Real Reasons Planes Go Around (That No One Ever Explains)

Let me walk you through the actual triggers I’ve seen cause go-arounds — things that have nothing to do with pilot error, mechanical problems, or near-misses.

The Far Field Monitor Alarm

This is a big one, and passengers never hear about it.

The ILS critical area is a protected zone around the localizer and glideslope antennas. Nothing — absolutely nothing — is supposed to be in this area during an approach because it can distort the signal.

The Far Field Monitor continuously measures the ILS signal. If anything enters the critical area — a vehicle, another aircraft taxiing too close, even a large bird or wildlife — the signal characteristics change. The FFM detects this and triggers an alarm.

When that alarm goes off, air traffic control immediately instructs the approaching aircraft to go around. The pilot might not know why. The passengers definitely don’t. But from the ground, we can see exactly what happened: A catering truck drove into the hold-short line. A 747 on the taxiway parked too close to the glideslope antenna. The system detected the interference and said, “Stop this approach.”

You went around because a truck was in the wrong spot. That’s it.

ILS Signal Degradation

The ILS provides two critical pieces of information: lateral guidance (are you lined up with the runway centerline?) and vertical guidance (are you on the correct descent path?).

These signals are constantly monitored. If the localizer or glideslope drifts out of tolerance — even slightly — the system flags it as unreliable.

This can happen for multiple reasons: Equipment aging, environmental changes, and even atmospheric conditions affecting signal propagation. We have strict tolerances because aircraft use these signals for precision approaches in low visibility. If the signal isn’t perfect, we don’t use it.

When an ILS signal is flagged as degraded, controllers can’t clear aircraft for precision approaches. If you’re already on approach when the degradation is detected, you’re going around.

You went around because a ground-based radio signal wasn’t meeting spec. The pilot couldn’t see it. You couldn’t see it. But the monitoring equipment caught it.

Runway Visual Range Drops Below Minimums

RVR sensors sit alongside the runway and continuously measure visibility. They report in real-time to air traffic control.

Every aircraft and pilot has minimum visibility requirements for landing, based on the type of approach, the aircraft’s equipment, and the pilot’s qualifications. These minimums exist for very good reasons.

Here’s the thing about weather: It changes fast. Your aircraft might start an approach with visibility at 4,000 feet RVR. Two minutes later, a fog bank rolls in and visibility drops to 2,400 feet. If your minimums are 2,800 feet, you’re going around.

This happens all the time. The weather between “starting the approach” and “actually landing” can change dramatically. The RVR sensors detect it instantly. The tower sees the updated RVR report. The go-around call is made.

You went around because visibility dropped 100 feet below what was legal for your approach — a change you probably couldn’t even perceive from your seat.

Runway Lighting System Failure

Approach lights, runway edge lights, centerline lights, touchdown zone lights — these aren’t decorative. In low visibility, they’re essential visual references. In fact, certain approach categories legally require specific lighting to be operational.

If a lighting circuit fails during your approach — even if it’s just one section of approach lights — it might disqualify the approach type you’re flying.

I’ve seen go-arounds triggered because a circuit breaker in the approach lighting system tripped. From the cockpit, the pilots might not immediately notice the outage. But the control tower sees the lighting panel indication change—the approach category changes. The go-around is initiated.

You went around because a light-bulb circuit failed, and regulations require specific lighting for the approach being flown.

Traffic on the Runway

This one seems obvious, but passengers misunderstand what “traffic on the runway” actually means.

You might assume it means another plane is still landing. Usually, it’s much simpler: The previous aircraft hasn’t cleared the runway yet.

Controllers maintain specific separation standards. If the aircraft ahead of you is slow to exit the runway — maybe they missed a taxiway turnoff, maybe they’re a heavy aircraft that needs more distance to decelerate — there’s a defined point where they must decide: Will that aircraft be clear in time, or should we send this one around?

Sometimes it’s a judgment call made with seconds to spare. Sometimes, wake turbulence separation requires extra spacing between large aircraft and small aircraft. Sometimes it’s just bad timing.

You went around because the plane ahead of you was still on the runway and wouldn’t be clear in time for you to land safely.

Wind Shear Alerts

This is one I saw from a different angle earlier in my career. When I was an FAA technician, I helped maintain Low-Level Wind Shear Alert Systems (LLWAS) — networks of wind sensors positioned around the airport that detect sudden wind shifts near the runway.

These systems are fascinating because they’re watching for something invisible and dangerous: rapid changes in wind speed or direction that can affect aircraft performance during the critical landing phase.

When the LLWAS detects wind shear on final approach, it generates an alert that controllers immediately relay to aircraft. Depending on the severity and location of the shear, this can trigger an immediate go-around.

Here’s what made this eye-opening when I worked on these systems: The wind shear that triggers the alert might not be something pilots feel yet. The sensors detect the condition developing before the aircraft encounters it. By the time the go-around is initiated, the plane might still be in smooth air.

From your seat, everything feels normal. The ride is stable. Then suddenly you’re climbing away from the runway.

What you didn’t feel was the wind shear ahead of you — the condition the ground-based sensors caught before you got there.

You went around because sensors detected a wind condition that could affect the approach, even if the ride felt perfectly smooth from your seat.

What Pilots Know vs. What Ground Systems Show

Here’s something that surprises many passengers: Sometimes the pilot executing the go-around doesn’t know the specific trigger either.

The instruction from air traffic control might be as simple as: “Go around. Traffic on the runway.” Or “Go around. ILS unreliable.” Or “Go around.”

The pilot executes immediately. There’s no time for a detailed briefing. The focus is on flying the published missed approach procedure, climbing safely, and getting ready for another attempt.

From the cockpit, pilots see their instruments: altitude, airspeed, heading, and navigation displays. They trust those instruments and air traffic control.

From the ground, controllers see equipment status displays, radar tracks, system alarms, and real-time sensor data. They make the go-around call based on information the pilot doesn’t have access to.

The gap between what caused the go-around and what passengers hear about it is enormous. The pilot announces “we’re going around,” but the real story is in the ground systems data that triggered the decision.

I’ve watched go-arounds happen from my equipment console for situations where:

• A service vehicle entered the ILS critical area and triggered the FFM alarm
• An RVR sensor reported “unreliable” due to a calibration drift
• A preceding aircraft was 15 seconds too slow in clearing the runway
• An approach light circuit showed a ground fault on the monitoring panel

None of these triggers suggests danger to passengers. They tell a system working exactly as designed — being appropriately conservative, maintaining safety margins, and choosing “try again” over “hope this works.”

The Decision Happens in Seconds (And That’s A Good Thing)

Go-around decisions are made fast. Really fast.

There’s a concept in aviation called the “go-around window”—the altitude and distance from the runway at which a go-around can still be executed safely and smoothly. Below a certain point, the physics of aviation make a go-around more complicated and riskier.

So when controllers see a trigger — whether it’s an equipment alarm, a visibility drop, or traffic that won’t be clear — they make the call immediately. They don’t deliberate. They don’t wait to see if conditions improve. They issue the go-around instruction while it’s still easy to execute.

This is by design. The system is built to be decisive and conservative.

Passengers experience this as sudden and jarring. Controllers and pilots experience this as routine decision-making with clear thresholds and immediate action.

From your seat, you feel the sudden engine spool-up and the aggressive pitch change. From the cockpit and the tower, this is a practiced maneuver with standardized callouts and procedures that have been rehearsed hundreds of times.

Why This Should Actually Make You Feel Safer

I know that intellectually understanding go-arounds doesn’t immediately eliminate the fear. Your body still reacts to the sudden acceleration and climb. Your brain still floods with adrenaline when you realize you’re not landing as expected.

But here’s the reframe I offer to nervous flyers: A go-around is proof that the system isn’t cutting corners.

Think about how conservative these triggers are:

• A vehicle in the wrong place? Go around.
• Visibility dropped slightly below minimums? Go around.
• Signal not perfect? Go around.
• Are the lights not fully operational? Go around.
• Preceding traffic still on runway? Go around.

The system doesn’t say “well, it’s probably fine,” or “we’re close enough,” or “let’s see what happens.” It says, “Conditions aren’t optimal, let’s try again.”

This is the safest possible approach to aviation operations. The ground infrastructure, the monitoring equipment, the procedures — all of it is designed with conservative safety margins built in.

From my perspective, maintaining these systems, I’d rather see 100 go-arounds for minor issues than one landing that proceeded despite a system alarm. Every go-around I’ve monitored from the ground reinforces my confidence in the system.

The equipment works. The procedures work. The conservative decision-making works.

What You Can Do Next Time You Experience a Go-Around

Knowledge changes experience. The next time you’re on an approach and the plane suddenly climbs away from the runway:

Remember: This is routine. This is normal. This is the system working.

Recognize: The trigger might be something only visible from ground systems — equipment the pilot trusts, and you never see.

Understand: The decision was made quickly and conservatively, exactly as designed.

Know: You’re not in danger. You’re in a system that refuses to accept “close enough” when it comes to safety.

The announcement will still be brief. You still won’t get the detailed explanation. But you’ll know that somewhere, a ground system detected something — maybe a signal tolerance issue, perhaps a visibility change, maybe traffic spacing — and made the conservative call.

That’s not a failure. That’s the system refusing to compromise on safety.

The Ground Perspective Changes Everything

For 24 years, I’ve been the guy on the ground watching aircraft approach runways. I’ve maintained the ILS that guides them in. I’ve monitored the RVR that tells them if they can see. I’ve checked the lighting systems that illuminate their path. I’ve responded to alarms that trigger go-arounds.

Here’s what I know that passengers don’t: The vast majority of go-arounds happen because the system said “not quite right” — not because anything was actually dangerous.

From the ground, I can see the specific trigger. I can see the alarm that sounded, the threshold that was crossed, and the parameter that went out of tolerance. And almost every time, my reaction is: “Yeah, that’s the right call.”

The infrastructure is designed to be cautious. The thresholds are deliberately conservative. The decision-making is immediate and uncompromising.

From your seat, you experience uncertainty and fear. From my console, I see a system refusing to cut corners.

That’s the perspective shift I want you to have. The next time you’re approaching a runway and the engines suddenly roar back to full power, remember: Somewhere on the ground, a system just did its job perfectly. An alarm sounded, a threshold was crossed, a parameter changed — and the conservative decision was made.

You’re not in danger. You’re in one of the safest transportation systems humans have ever built, and it’s working exactly as designed.

You’re going around because the system refuses to accept “close enough.” And that’s precisely what you want.

Want to Understand the Full Picture of How Landing Systems Work?

If this inside perspective intrigued you, I’ve created a free guide that goes deeper: “Why Your Plane Can’t Land: Understanding Approach Categories and the Systems That Get You to the Runway.”

You’ll learn:

• What “Category I, II, and III” approaches actually mean
• How ILS, GPS, and visual approaches differ (and why it matters to you)
• Why some approaches work in any weather, and others don’t
• The ground equipment on which your safety depends (that you never see)

It’s written the same way — an FAA engineer explaining what passengers are never told, in plain language that makes sense.

Disclaimer: FAA Employee — All views expressed are personal and do not represent official FAA guidance. For official aviation information, visit FAA.gov.