Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Time Pressure
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Human Factors; Procedure
During descent/arrival stage of our flight; I briefed the LOC 27 Approach and advised my First Officer that I would be fully configured to land at CIJHI well before the FAF of REEBO due to the steep angle of the approach procedure of 3.5 degrees. Approach issued vectors to final during downwind. During downwind to base; Approach requested us to maintain 180 knots until REEBO. I 'casually' obliged. In doing so; I neglected to remember that I originally wanted to be configured to land well before that FIX. I had flaps 2 and asked for gear down on base. Approaching CIJHI I realized that holding 180 knots until REEBO was not going to work because I knew I would end up 'behind the curve.' I then turned off the Autopilot and Autothrottles and leveled off at REEBO to try to slow and configure on speed. I was able to fully configure at REEBO but noticed that my Airspeed was around VLS + 30 on the descent. I extended the speed brakes but it didn't help much. After ascertaining that I was not in a stable configuration to land; I initiated a Go-Around. We then got vectored around again and configured well before REEBO. During the final approach phase before and after REEBO; I noticed that we had a strong TAILWIND of at least 20-30 knots at altitude; which I didn't notice on our previous approach. My Airspeed was approximately VLS+15 to 20 but manageable because I was fully configured. I once again turned off the Autopilot and Autothrottles and followed the FPA (Flight Path Angle) down where the tailwind dropped off and my speed slowly recovered to approx. VLS+10 before touchdown. We landed without further incident.I surmised that because we had a tailwind that it contributed to our excess airspeed and in addition to ATC; requesting us to maintain 180 knots until REEBO not knowing there was this tailwind didn't make for an ideal situation for a stable approach. I suggest that we DO NOT accept any speed requests from ATC at REEBO in excess of our final approach; fully configured speed because I feel a stable approach will not be possible. In addition to that; not knowing that there would possibly be a tailwind at that higher altitude on approach would exacerbate the situation and make a stable approach impossible to achieve.
A widebody air carrier Captain reported executing a go-around during an unstable approach because of the high speed assigned by ATC close in to the airfield.