Search

3rd of October 2010, Blog #556

During their flight preparation, the crew of a Boeing 767-324 checked the weather for their arrival at Bristol (England). Based on their passenger load, the on-route weather and the weather at Bristol decided to take 45.300 kg of fuel (minimum required 44.100 kg).

Damaged tot the fuselage crown (© AAIB)


The flight, with a crew of 12 and 258 passengers, was uneventful with the co-pilot as pilot flying (PF) and the Captain as pilot monitoring (PM). Prior to the top of descent, the approach briefing was completed, The landing was planned with flap 30 and the autobrake set to 4, this due to the length of the runway. Just after starting their descent, the crew obtained the weather for Bristol;

  • Runway 09 is in use

  • Wind - 100º at 10 knots

  • Visibility 1400 meters in rain

  • Clouds scattered at 100 ft and broken at 400 ft

During the descent the captain assumed the role of PF, this was due to the weather conditions at bristol, which were worse than presented to them at the briefing prior to the flight. Also, the amount of turbulence surprised the crew.

Damage to the lower nose section marked with tape (© AAIB) The aircraft was configured early on the approach due to the challenging weather. ATC provided the crew with the latest weather and informed the crew that the runway was wet over its full length. During the approach, a crosswind was observed of 52 knots, which would change to the reported headwind later during the approach.

At 400 feet the PF became visual with the runway (which was obstructed by a window frame for the PM). The autopilot and autothrottles were disconnected. An EGPWS (Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System) "GLIDESLOPE" annunciation was heard several times, but reference to the PAPI confirmed they were on the correct glide path. As the approach continued the EGPWS radi altitude callouts were made; : ‘Fifty’; ‘Forty’; ‘Twenty’; ‘Ten' (the 'Thirty" call was snot mad, as the descent rate at the time was possibly to high). The PF made a normal nose up input to flaer the aircraft, however the touchdown was unusually hard. The touch down was firm enough causing the crew to be thrown forward, resulting in a rapid de-rotation and the nose landing gear contacting the runway. The roll out and taxi to the gate were unevent full. An entry in the aircraft Technical Log was made and the company's engineers were informed.

FDR Data from the approach and landing (© AAIB) A phase one hard landing inspection were carried out by the operator in accordance with AMM 05-51-01. The most significant damage was to the crown skins between frames STA 610 and STA 632 and stringers 14 L and 14 R.


The Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) was informed that a hard landing had taken place and they initiated an investigation in to the accident. During the investigation a wide range of subjects were part of the investigation. One of them was the aircraft history, during this part of the investigation it became apparent that on the 19 September 2000, when the aircraft was previously operated by another airline, it sustained similar damage to the upper crown skins. The repair was carried out by a team from Boeing. The maintenance records revealed that since the operator had taken delivery of the aircraft in December 2004 and there had only been one other report of a hard landing that occurred on 16 March 2010.

The damage to the aircraft when a hard landing had occured on the 19th of September 2000 (© AAIB)


The AAIB report on this hard landing contains several Safety Recommendations and safety actions taken by the operator, The conclusion of the resort was follows;

"Damage to the fuselage occurred as a result of rapid de-rotation of the aircraft following a hard landing on the main landing gear. The runway profile, nuisance GPWS alerts and the meteorological conditions may have influenced the landing"


The AAIB accident investigation report, on which this blog is based, with all details on this accident is available by clicking on the .pdf file below;

B767 hardlanding 3-oct-2010
.pdf
Download PDF • 1.32MB


103 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All