Narrative:

The first officer was pilot flying. The weather in atl was deteriorating but well within minimums for the first officer (first officer) to continue flying. We were being vectored to ILS prm runway 10 in IMC conditions; moderate turbulence; and moderate rain. The first officer had the autopilot engaged and was manually 'helping' the auto throttles keep the proper airspeed in very trying conditions. Approaching glideslope intercept; the first officer configured the aircraft and began slowing normally. Immediately after glideslope intercept; we were given an ATC directed breakout. After executing the breakout and on radar crosswind; I asked the controller why were we broken out. He replied that we weren't slowing down. I chose not to argue and returned to my duties as pilot monitoring. Now being vectored back into the radar pattern for another ILS prm runway 10. We accomplished our normal checklists and preparation for the next approach. Upon being cleared for the approach on dogleg to final; I stated; 'approaching inbound course' as per our procedures. The first officer reached up and hit the ILS arm button on the mode control panel and I noticed it did not arm. I attempted several pushes of the ILS arm button to no avail and as the raw data showed us approaching the localizer; I directed the first officer to manually intercept the localizer. As the first officer disconnected the autopilot and was turning the aircraft onto the localizer; the aircraft flew past the beam. I noted the first officer had a good correction and the lateral deviation was minor so I didn't think it was a problem at this point. Immediately we were given another breakout from ATC. We performed the breakout maneuver once again. On the next ILS prm runway 10; I took control of the aircraft so as to give my first officer a break from the very difficult flying conditions. This approach was normal and allowed to continue and landing was uneventful. Contributing factors to this chain of events are identified as the weather; the automation difficulties in arming the approach; and the stress of two prm breakout procedures in IMC. To a lesser extent are my first officer's experience level as a new-hire and my experience on the airplane only since the same date.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Pilots report of two go-arounds into ATL caused by weather; equipment not arming and vectors to final. Aircraft landed on third attempt.

Narrative: The First Officer was pilot flying. The weather in ATL was deteriorating but well within minimums for the First Officer (FO) to continue flying. We were being vectored to ILS PRM Runway 10 in IMC conditions; moderate turbulence; and moderate rain. The FO had the autopilot engaged and was manually 'helping' the auto throttles keep the proper airspeed in very trying conditions. Approaching glideslope intercept; the FO configured the aircraft and began slowing normally. Immediately after glideslope intercept; we were given an ATC directed breakout. After executing the breakout and on radar crosswind; I asked the controller why were we broken out. He replied that we weren't slowing down. I chose not to argue and returned to my duties as Pilot Monitoring. Now being vectored back into the radar pattern for another ILS PRM Runway 10. We accomplished our normal checklists and preparation for the next approach. Upon being cleared for the approach on dogleg to final; I stated; 'Approaching inbound course' as per our procedures. The FO reached up and hit the ILS arm button on the Mode Control Panel and I noticed it did not arm. I attempted several pushes of the ILS arm button to no avail and as the raw data showed us approaching the localizer; I directed the FO to manually intercept the localizer. As the FO disconnected the autopilot and was turning the aircraft onto the localizer; the aircraft flew past the beam. I noted the FO had a good correction and the lateral deviation was minor so I didn't think it was a problem at this point. Immediately we were given another breakout from ATC. We performed the breakout maneuver once again. On the next ILS PRM Runway 10; I took control of the aircraft so as to give my FO a break from the very difficult flying conditions. This approach was normal and allowed to continue and landing was uneventful. Contributing factors to this chain of events are identified as the weather; the automation difficulties in arming the approach; and the stress of two PRM breakout procedures in IMC. To a lesser extent are my FO's experience level as a new-hire and my experience on the airplane only since the same date.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.