Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for a visual approach Runway X into ZZZ. FO was flying he configured to gear down flaps 30 when the glideslope came alive at the FAF ZZZZZ. The fix is around 3.5 NM from the runway. As we were descending on glideslope I told the FO; that we were at 1;400 feet AFE and to continue slowing down since he was around 165 kts; in order for us to be stable by 1;000 feet; he continued slowing down; and asked for flaps 45 degrees. Unfortunately; by the time we reach 1;000 we were fully configured for landing but too fast; so I told him to go-around and try it again. We completed a go-around per the POH profile; I spoke with Approach and Tower and eventually we received vectors back around to Runway X where we landed without any further issues. They asked the reason for the go-around; I told them it was due to being unstable. Flight attendants and passengers were notified as we were being vectored back to Runway X and After landing and arriving at the gate; Dispatch was notified.I detected our height from the field elevation around 1;400 AFE and noticed that we were still too fast around 165 kts judging our distance from the runway and a 3.0 degree angle glide path; I asked the FO to keep slowing down so we could be stable by 1;000 feet; he did by asking flaps 45 before landing checklist; but by the time we were at 1;000 feet we were too fast still. Therefore; unstable.FO being fully configured by 1;000 feet but too fast. Therefore; not complying with all the criteria required for a stable approach.FO reacted by slowing down and asking for flaps 45 degrees; unfortunately by the time we reached 1;000 feet we were too fast. Therefore; I asked him to go-around and try the approach again.Before the flight; the FO introduced himself and told me he was a low time FO and hasn't flown much in the past 2 months; most likely due to the reduced flying situation the industry is experiencing at the time. He told me he was still low time. He did very well during the entire flight; unfortunately by the time we were executing the approach he started getting behind the airplane by the time he asked for gear down flaps 30; because he thought that he had enough distance to keep slowing down the airplane he took his time; without realizing that the ZZZZZ FAF fix is only 3.5 NM from the runway slightly closer than others standard FAF at different airports/approaches and therefore he should've kept slowing down. I pointed to the fact that we were approaching 1;000 feet around 1;400 feet that and he was too fast still too fast; he reacted by asking for flaps 45 degrees. However; by the time we reached 1;000 feet he was still too fast. He performed the go-around and his second approach was much better. I would say a suggestion for this issue would be to rotate new low time FO's to fly more often whenever is possible. I know it's hard due to the current flying demand; but after we talked after landing about why we went around; he said he hasn't flow much in the past 2 months and unfortunately he fell behind during the approach phase of the flight.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an unstabilized approach resulting in a go-around.