ASL B734 at Amsterdam on Dec 19th 2023, insufficient rotation on takeoff
Last Update: August 28, 2025 / 18:25:55 GMT/Zulu time
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 19, 2023
Classification
Report
Airline
ASL Airlines
Departure
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Destination
Brussels, Belgium
Aircraft Registration
EI-STW
Aircraft Type
Boeing 737-400
ICAO Type Designator
B734
The Dutch Onderzoeksraad (DSB) concluded (without releasing a separate investigation report):
The incorrect loading of the ballast block happened within the context of time pressure, where papers were signed without actually checking the correct position of the ballast block. This resulted in center of gravity being significantly further forwards than the flight crew assumed and created a mismatch of the stabilizer trim position.
Elevator deflection during rotation at the calculated Vr was ineffective because the stabilizer was seven units out of the required trim position. This delayed rotation and lift off and demanded more runway length. Despite the fact that the center of gravity was significantly out of the flight envelope, with the adjusted stabilizer trim the aircraft was controllable during the remainder of the flight.
When using intersection E4, the available runway length (TORA) and take-off distance (TODA) were adequate for the actual required runway length and threshold obstacle clearance.
The Dutch Onderzoeksraad (DSB) analysed:
The loading process
Neither the supervisor of the cargo company nor the staff of the ground handler had checked whether the aircraft had been loaded correctly, but nevertheless signed the loading papers. Airline procedures required only the captain to sign the load sheet, but not the flight crew to check the correct loading of the aircraft. The first officer - standing next to the ballast block when closing the cargo door – did not realise that it was on the wrong position. Consequently, the ballast block remained at the cargo door position causing the CG to be significantly further forward than assumed by the flight crew and with effect on the pitch controllability.
The flight crew had set the trim in accordance with the load sheet (4.42 units trim position corresponding a CG position of 10,6 % MAC). However, the actual CG position was -8,9 % MAC, which was significantly beyond the 7% forward limit. This difference in CG position represented an equivalent of 7 trim units for take-off and explaining the elevator control difficulty during rotation. With a CG position of -9 % during landing, the aircraft remained controllable at that time.
The supervisor believed that he had communicated with the foreman that the ballast block could stay on its position. However, the ground handlers nevertheless offloaded the ballast block together with the five containers as they believed this had been instructed. This misunderstanding could not be explained. As only two scanners were available for loading, not every ground handler (six in total) may have known the loading plan and miscommunication cannot be ruled out.
The take-off roll
The take-off was normal until the rotation speed was reached. The first officer applied almost full nose up elevator deflection for rotating the aircraft. Despite applying full nose up elevator, the aircraft did not rotate to a lift off attitude. Only when the airspeed increased from the calculated Vr of 118 knots up to a value of 134 knots, the first officer was able to rotate the aircraft into the air. With an airspeed of 150 knots the aircraft lifted-off and he used the elevator trim to reduce the required control force for elevator up. Once in trim, the control of the aircraft was normal.
For the take-off performance calculation, the flight crew used the maximum allowable thrust reduction as the aircraft was almost empty and with a fuel load for the short flight to Brussels. Therefore, an intersection take-off was possible, which resulted in a reduced available runway length. Even with this reduced length, the aircraft became airborne before the midway point of the available runway and crossed the reciprocal runway threshold at 718 feet.
Aircraft Registration Data
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 19, 2023
Classification
Report
Airline
ASL Airlines
Departure
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Destination
Brussels, Belgium
Aircraft Registration
EI-STW
Aircraft Type
Boeing 737-400
ICAO Type Designator
B734
This article is published under license from Avherald.com. © of text by Avherald.com.
Article source
You can read 2 more free articles without a subscription.
Subscribe now and continue reading without any limits!
Read unlimited articles and receive our daily update briefing. Gain better insights into what is happening in commercial aviation safety.
Send tip
Support AeroInside by sending a small tip amount.
Related articles
ASL B734 at Belfast on Oct 4th 2016, partial main gear failure and burst main tyres on landing
An ASL Airlines Boeing 737-400 freighter in TNT Express Colours, registration OE-IAG performing flight 3V-834V from East Midlands,EN to Belfast…
Newest articles
Fleet type match
Commute E145 near Shreveport on Mar 10th 2026, smell of smoke in cockpit
A CommuteAir Embraer ERJ-145 on behalf of United, registration N14148 performing flight UA-4887 from Houston Intercontinental,TX to Knoxville,TN…
Fleet type match
American A321 enroute on Mar 10th 2026, dropped parts of thrust reverser
An American Airlines Airbus A321-200, registration N108NN performing flight AA-373 from Boston,MA to Los Angeles,CA (USA), departed Boston's runway…
Subscribe today
Are you researching aviation incidents? Get access to AeroInside Insights, unlimited read access and receive the daily newsletter.
Pick your plan and subscribePartner
ELITE Simulation Solutions is a leading global provider of Flight Simulation Training Devices, IFR training software as well as flight controls and related services. Find out more.
SafetyScan Pro provides streamlined access to thousands of aviation accident reports. Tailored for your safety management efforts. Book your demo today
AeroInside Blog
Popular aircraft
Airbus A320Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-800 MAX
Popular airlines
American AirlinesUnited
Delta
Air Canada
Lufthansa
British Airways