I didn’t ask if you could fly missed following a balked (not sure that is the word for a go round due to bounce) landing. It wouldn’t normally be something I would do but never say never and there may be some airfields which demand it or some circumstances.
gallois wrote:
If regulations or airfield rules say nothing to the contrary and it is not against your company’s SOP, it is up to you to decide what is safe and what is not
Of course, if you are talking about safety concerns, you can even bypass regulation and airfield rules : just fly the plane first 
but that was not your question? you asked if you can fly missed from balked landing under normal circumstances with no safety concerns
In US, read FAA AIM section 5-4-21.h, “In the event a balked (rejected) landing occurs…”
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap5_section_4.html#3HI78JACK
In Germany, as Boscomantico said, past MAPT it’s the SID for you
In France & UK, nothing written anywhere, as you please or judge
I wasn’t getting into the safety aspects and whether its in TERPS or PAN OPS.
I agree totally both in the legal and operational sense with @Peter in that not everything can or has to be written down in some sort of legal framework. A certain amount especially when it comes to safety is left to the discretion and common sense of the PIC.
If following a bounce you think it is safest to go back to the MAP and fly the missed approach then that’s up to you. If you think it is safer to do a low level circuit and land, that too is up to you. If you want to depart and start again at the IAF that is also up to you.
If regulations or airfield rules say nothing to the contrary and it is not against your company’s SOP, it is up to you to decide what is safe and what is not. Sometimes you need to decide quickly which is why you plan TEM and brief.
gallois wrote:
Is bouncing on landing followed by taking to the air again considered a missed approach? or is it a go around or touch and go? Serious question, I don’t recall it saying anything in regs or text books.
You can go into all semantics: missed, low pass, bounce, touch-n-go, full-stop, balked, departure…the safest thing to do in 400ft ceiling depends if you are on TERPS or PANS-OPS? if you are on 3D APV or 2D NPA? if there is SID or OMNI?
If circling and omnidirectional are published for that instrument runway, joining your missed via departure and circling is very trivial
For ATC clearance after balked landing, things are very crystal clear in US (@NCYankee can confirm) and Germany (exactly as @Boscomantico said) but I am not sure about UK and France? instrument procedures are not designed by perfectionists and ATC standards varies between units, mostly depending if radar rated? and their nearby coordination practices? plus when operating without ATC in Golf, the clearance question is very moot
You can also ask questions on clearance limit, when you change transponder code, when they close flight plan after touchdown or vacate or stop? I think this also depends on ATC and there is no consensus…for sure you can’t land without ATC tower clearance (the approach clearance is not enough)
This is very relevant when you talk about IFR operations without ATC and without IFP, there is a good reason why places like UK, France practically and legally allow such operations (partial or disjoint system) while not practical, maybe illegal, in Germany (joint and integrated system)
I think the term for a go around after the MAP would be “balked landing”.
Is bouncing on landing followed by taking to the air again considered a missed approach?
Or is it a go around or touch and go? Serious question, I don’t recall it saying anything in regs or text books.
It is definitely true and also correct. One can’t be cleared for a standard missed approach once gone past the MAP of an approach (either because of a low approach, low pass, touch n go or late go-around). SIDs “start” from the runway, so they can obviously be used in these cases and will warrant terrain clearance.
I am really serious, the missed is not designed to work for takeoff as far design specs are concerned, if you bounce on landing you are supposed to fly circuit or departure or fly missed exactly as published by intercepting the missed procedure or climb to circling height and area before go back to missed point…this may not be relevant for Shoreham takeoff with plenty of room but the plates warn against late missed, if one bothers reading
This make lot of sense in LOWZ (I think an SR22 tried to join missed 10km after they have gone past missed point and runway threshold, they end up in a mountain), there is a takeoff procedure takes you back to the valley away from the mountain though
If I bounce at Shoreham with 100ft ceiling, I will turn to fly south-east and climb to my safe altitude
Somone told me German ATC assign SID if you go missed from bounced landing (bellow MDA or past MAPT), I have not heard this confirmed maybe @Malibuflyer knows more?
I think Job #1 is working out the grammar, and which bits are serious and which are just flippant …
It is a serious topic. Bouncing on landing and unable to get up again???
Peter wrote:
That is simply not true. If it were true you could never take off.
Ibra has a point. With a complicated obstacle situation a departure procedure may be more constrained than a missed approach procedure, so the MA procedure would not necessarily also work as a departure procedure, while the reverse would be true. (I’m not saying that would be the case at EGKA.)
But it is not quite as bad as Ibra suggests. He’s right that the missed approach procedure starts at several hundred feet above the airport, while departures by definition start on the ground. It matters less that the MAP is at the threshold (or earlier) as the missed approach procedure design assumes that the start of climb begins a substantial distance after the MAP, both because of fixing tolerances and pilot reaction time.
