Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Performed CAT II ILS. At minimums; as I stated missed approach and hit the TOGA buttons; I heard the FO state 'in sight'. As the aircraft started to pitch up; I saw the runway environment and stated 'in sight landing'. I disconnected the Auto Throttles and Auto Pilot as they were just starting on the missed approach. I misjudged the path angle and landing with the lower visibility and landed just beyond the touchdown zone. Lower visibility contributed and then I erroneously decided to land instead of continue the missed approach. Once the decision to go missed has been made; we should always continue the missed approach; even if we are stabilized; unless we have an emergency.


Second narrative: [Our] flight was conducted during low visibility CAT II conditions. The Captain was the PF and the First Officer was the PM. Right at the minimums call out; the Captain called 'missed approach' while the First Officer called 'runway in sight;' both at the same time. The Captain pressed the TOGA button to initiate the missed approach; but as the aircraft nose was pitched up; the Captain saw that the runway actually was in sight. Captain decided to abandon the missed approach; discontinued the auto pilot and auto throttle; and initiated descent to land on the runway. Due to the initial pitch up movement to begin the missed approach; and the initial power increase; the aircraft was higher and faster than usual for landing. The Captain kept descending the aircraft onto the runway; floated; and touchdown was made just beyond the touchdown zone. The cause of the event was low visibility weather and communication. Weather at the destination was fluctuating above and below the company's CAT II minimums. Already; the flight had been holding before being able to conduct the approach to landing. In addition; the Captain and the First Officer announced their respective calls at the exact same time; leading the Captain to conduct the missed approach when the runway was in sight. When the minimums call out was made by the automation; the Captain announced 'missed approach' while the First Officer announced 'runway in sight.' At that time; there were 3 call outs being made at the same time from 3 different sources. To avoid recurrence of the event; if a missed approach is initiated; the crew should then be committed to the missed approach. It is safer and more stable to continue to conduct a missed approach; even if the runway becomes in sight. This will result in proper landing within the touchdown zone; and not landing long. The crew should have continued on the missed approach; instead of the decision being changed to land on the runway. All 3 call outs must be made clear so that everyone is on the same page when it comes to verifying if a missed approach is necessary at minimums.


Synopsis: ERJ-175 flight crew reported landing beyond the touchdown zone following a CAT II approach during which a missed approach was initiated and then terminated.