Air carrier pilot reported an EGPWS terrain warning during an unstable approach.

Date: 2024-04 · Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng · Phase: approach

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|inflight-event-encounter-cftt-cfit|inflight-event-encounter-unstabilized-approach

Synopsis

Air carrier pilot reported an EGPWS terrain warning during an unstable approach.

Narrative

Runway 05 at ORF is undergoing construction. This was my first time flying into ORF since the construction began. Many of the published approaches to runway 05 were NA and/or out of service due to the construction. This was a night time arrival where the weather had broken ceilings at 5;000 ft and gusty quartering headwinds. Approach gave us direct to CALEY (initial fix for runway 05) to intercept the final for runway 05. To navigate and backup the visual approach; we loaded the RNAV (GPS) M Rwy 5 as noted in the dispatch release stating the approach is available and authorized. We previously accomplished the before landing checklist 'to the line' and only had the 'below the line' items to accomplish as we approached CALEY. As the pilot flying; I became fixated on finding the runway at night after descending through broken cloud layers. The aircraft was configured with gear down and flaps 15 as we approached CALEY. I called for aircraft configuration from flaps 15 to flaps 25 as we navigated passed CALEY to COSTR (final approach fix). I spotted the runway and my attention focused on navigating to the runway to land. I did not call for flaps 30 or 'below the line' on the before landing checklist prior to COSTR because of my focus on lining up to fly a visual to Runway 05. I continued to descend until we received a GPWS warning at approximately 300 feet and immediately executed a go-around. That is when I realized the aircraft was only at flaps 25 and not being fully configured was the reason for receiving the GPWS warning. We accomplished the go-around and climbed to 2;000 feet per ATC instructions. ATC then vectored us to set-up again for a visual to runway 05. That approach led to a fully configured landing on runway 05. Cause: Causal factors that played a role in this event were: 1) My fixation on finding the runway at night. 2) The ceilings at 5;000 feet that made it difficult to find the runway confidently and quickly. 3) Many of the normal lighting features for a runway such as a PAPI and the centerline lights are NOTAM'd out of service due to the construction.Suggestions: My recommendation to prevent this type of event from occurring in the future is to follow the procedures for the before landing checklist to be configured by the final approach fix. My attention on locating the runway took my focus away from finishing aircraft configuration. Even though I had a 2 mile ring around the FAF in the fix page as a reminder to be configured; my attention was mostly outside. I also recommend pilots to consider asking to fly the RNAV (GPS) M Rwy 5 even in visual conditions to be appropriately lined up for the runway; particularly for pilots flying into ORF for the first time since the construction began.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.