**NetJets Pilots Assert They Cannot Execute Go Around Due to Insufficient Fuel**
VASAviation has recorded air traffic control communications and a visual representation of an occurrence on June 24, 2026, at Las Vegas Airport (LAS). The main aircraft involved was a NetJets Cessna Citation Latitude jet, with the callsign Execjet 659, making its approach to runway 8R from Albuquerque (ABQ). The flight duration was slightly longer than anticipated, but nothing seemed out of the ordinary.
The tower controller initially authorized the NetJets jet for landing, with Alaska Airlines flight AS806, an Airbus A330 from Honolulu (HNL), in sequence. Nevertheless, just before landing, the following dialogue took place:
– **Air traffic controller**: “Execjet 659, go around, I’ve got traffic on the runway. Climb and maintain 7,000, fly runway heading.”
– **NetJets pilot**: “Unable for fuel, sir.”
– **Air traffic controller**: “Roger that. Execjet 659, runway 8R, you’re cleared to land.”
– **NetJets pilot**: “8R, cleared to land.”
– **Air traffic controller**: “Alaska 806 heavy, traffic’s not gonna clear the runway. Go around, cancel approach clearance, climb and maintain 7,000, fly runway heading.”
**There Are Numerous Odd Aspects of This Exchange**
Normally, when air traffic control instructs a go around, pilots are expected to comply for safety reasons. The assertion by the NetJets pilots that they were unable to go around due to fuel was surprising since they had not indicated any minimum or emergency fuel state, which is the typical procedure.
Moreover, the controller did not provide a contact number for a potential pilot deviation inquiry, which is not standard practice. The claim regarding runway traffic was dubious, as the Alaska aircraft was told to go around because traffic wasn’t clearing the runway promptly, contradicting the original rationale.
This situation begs the question of whether the NetJets pilots suspected the controller of dishonesty and challenged the directive. Some theorize that a Southwest aircraft landing from the north may have necessitated the go around, yet the controller did not divert the Southwest plane when the NetJets pilots declined to comply.
The scenario implies that the controller may have favored the Alaska plane over the NetJets aircraft, possibly due to the shrinking distance between the two during their approaches.
**In Summary**
A NetJets plane nearing Las Vegas Airport was instructed to go around but declined due to fuel issues that had not been previously disclosed to air traffic control. The request to go around was linked to runway traffic, yet it appeared the NetJets plane faced delays to permit the Alaska plane to land without needing to go around.
**What are your thoughts on this incident at Las Vegas Airport regarding the go around?**