Flight Crew Last 90 Days 144; Flight Crew Total 17848; Flight Crew Type 614
Situational Awareness; Workload; Human-Machine Interface
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Airport; Procedure
Captain was Pilot Monitoring. First Officer (FO) was Pilot Flying. FO was being vectored downwind for a visual approach to LAX Runway 24L. ATC turned us onto Base leg sooner than expected. Aircraft energy was high at that point and FO made inputs to manage speed and descent. At 1;500 feet things seemed manageable as the aircraft was decelerating and descending as desired. Once joining the final approach course we fell behind the energy management of the aircraft. Captain prompted FO to lower the Landing Gear which the FO responded that he agreed that was a good idea. The landing gear was lowered at that time. Once the landing gear was down; aircraft speed began to slow more quickly and FO called for flaps as speed allowed. At this time we became aware that Tower Control was placing an aircraft into position on our landing runway. It became apparent that this was beginning to become a tight fit for us as we continued slow and to configure to a landing state/condition. At 500 feet; the Captain called Go-around. However; the aircraft on our landing runway received their Takeoff clearance and began to roll just prior to the go-around call by the Captain. When the Captain stated Go-around the Captain also said that if we execute a Go-around at this point; we would become an immediate conflict with the aircraft now taking off on our landing runway. The Captain decided under those circumstances it was a safer course of action to continue the approach and landing. The FO continued and landed the aircraft on runway 24L.
I failed to meet the required stabilized approach gates and should have performed a go around. At the time the captain and I realized this it was actually safer; in our opinion; to continue the approach to landing.The flight was a typical long range flight in that we were tired and ready to finish the long 6 day trip. I was the flying pilot and the flight was routine up to the approach phase. We were given a descent to 3;000 feet after SMO and expected a long downwind for Runway 24L. The typical landing runway; 24R; is closed for construction so 24L is being used for both takeoffs and landings. As we descended through about 3;500 feet; approach control gave us an early turn to heading 160 and asked us to call the airport in sight. The current aircraft condition was flaps 5 and 200 knots as assigned by ATC. I realized we were inside BOUBY and asked the captain to clean up the FMS. I also disconnected the autopilot to keep us from getting too high because the aircraft was going to capture the LOC at or above the GS. The captain was busy with multiple calls from ATC so I was manipulating the MCP as well. As soon as we joined final I realized I should have asked for flaps 15 on base leg. I asked for flaps 15; gear down and fully extended the speed brakes. We were getting high on the GS so I decided to capture the GS rather than slow down. I used speed brakes down to about 1;200 AGL and then stowed them. At 1;000 AGL the configuration was gear down; flaps 20; and 181 knots. We should have gone around at this point but I thought I could get the aircraft stabilized by the final 500 foot gate. Right at this time ATC cleared another aircraft for immediate takeoff and asked us to slow to approach speed. At about 900 AGL we selected flaps 30 and at 500 AGL got a momentary caution alert as the flaps were not yet at 30. We were all watching the aircraft that was cleared for takeoff on our landing runway but was not yet airborne. The captain said 'we should go around but we will be right on top of that guy'. I said 'I agree; continue'. We both saw continuing the approach to landing as the safest course of action at this point. We were on speed and configured by 400 AGL and continued to a normal landing; in the touchdown zone and made the planned turn off at AA taxiway. I realize I should have; corrected for speed failures earlier; gone around at 1;000 feet and asked tower for a turn or gone around at 500 feet and performed a turn on our own.
This flight crew reported that; due to an early turn toward the airport; the approach exceeded the parameters for a stable approach. However; due to a potential conflict with a departing aircraft on the same runway; both pilots determined that continuing the approach and landing was a better course of action than a go-around.