Jet2.com B752 at Alicante on Apr 10th 2017, tail strike on landing

Last Update: November 3, 2018 / 21:45:04 GMT/Zulu time

Bookmark this article

Photo of Jet2.com G-LSAI, Boeing 757-200 — Jet2.com G-LSAI, Boeing 757-200 (Photo credit: Aircaft @ Gloucestershire Airport By James / Flickr / License: CC by-sa)

Incident Facts

Date of incident
Apr 10, 2017

Classification
Accident

Cause
Tail strike on landing

Airline
Jet2.com

Flight number
LS-271

Departure
Leeds, United Kingdom

Destination
Alicante, Spain

Aircraft Registration
G-LSAI

Aircraft Type
Boeing 757-200

ICAO Type Designator
B752

A Jet2.com Boeing 757-200, registration G-LSAI performing flight LS-271 from Leeds,EN (UK) to Alicante,SP (Spain) with 230 passengers and 8 crew, landed on Alicante's runway 10 at 12:39L (10:39Z) but bounced on landing prompting the captain to take control of the aircraft, however, the tail of the aircraft struck the runway surface on bounce recovery. The aircraft rolled out without further incident. There were no injuries, the aircraft sustained substantial damage however.

Sources tell The Aviation Herald the damage may even cause a write off of the aircraft. The aircraft however was repaired and returned to service.

Spain's CIAIAC opened an investigation into the occurrence but provided no further details so far.

On Apr 18th 2017 the CIAIAC reported the tail of the aircraft contacted the runway surface while landing on runway 10. The aircraft continued the landing without further incident. The aircraft sustained substantial damage in the tail cone.

On Nov 3rd 2018 the CIAIAC released their final report concluding the probable causes of the accident was:

The investigation has determined that the cause of the accident was incorrect pitch position control during landing.

As a contributing factor, the fact that the aircraft captain (PM) could have intervened before the accident to correct the situation is highlighted.

The CIAIAC reported a line supervising captain (52, ATPL, 9,431 hours total, 1,000 hours on type) being pilot monitoring, a first officer on line training (36, CPL, 657 hours total, 285 hours on type), a line training captain (60, ATPL, 14,680 hours total, 4,455 hours on type) was in the observer's seat.

The CIAIAC described the sequence of events:

The copilot was the aircraft’s pilot flying (PF) during the whole route. The flight went smoothly and the crew carried out the final ILS Z approach manoeuvre for runway 10 at the Alicante-Elche airport maintaining stabilized approach parameters as described in the operator’s manual.

During the touchdown manoeuvre the aircraft reached a high pitch angle attitude which caused the rear of the aircraft to strike the runway surface.

After the tail area had struck the runway, the captain took control of the aircraft and continued the landing manoeuvre, completing it without any additional problems.

The technical crew were unaware that the aircraft’s tail area had touched the runway until they were informed at the parking area by one of the cabin crew that they had heard an unusual noise when landing.

The aircraft suffered damage to the lower part of the tail cone. All the people on board disembarked normally without any medical attention being required.

The aircraft received substantial damage, the CIAIAC described the damage: "Abrasive damage was caused to the underside of the fuselage, the rear sewage drainage probe and the VHF antenna located in the lower rear part. Damage to the partition bulkhead of the rear loading hold was additionally discovered."

The CIAIAC analysed:

The copilot, who was acting as pilot flying (PF), carried out control movements to increase pitch attitude from 100 ft height, at which point the speed began to decrease from the selected 130 kt, which corresponds to an additional 4 kt at the reference speed. At a height of 48 ft control movements were recorded on the control column to increase pitch attitude and power was reduced to idle four seconds later.

Nine seconds after starting the landing flare manoeuvre, touchdown was made with a pitch attitude of 5°, a calibrated speed of 119 kt and a vertical descent speed of 240 fpm. There was a vertical acceleration of 1.45 G corresponding to a firm impact. The nominal landing flare time range described in the FCTM is 4 to 8 seconds so the landing flare manoeuvre is considered slow, which the manufacturer identifies as a risk factor for tail strike.

Landing attitude close to 5º is identified as within the normal range with the correct reference speed (fig 6). However, the manual specifies (fig 7) that with a VREF-7 kt (119 kt) touchdown and with a weight of 181084 lb (82138 kg) the touchdown attitude would be close to 9º.

The position of the control column was slackened slightly after touchdown was made, but the pitch attitude tendency continued to increase until it reached a value of 10.2° at 10:39:19, reaching a 1.14 G vertical acceleration value. This attitude was maintained for one second.

According to the FCTM, this is the indicated approximate pitch attitude for the rear of the aircraft to make touchdown with levelled wings. When the pitch attitude reached 10.2°, a peak in the normal load factor was observed, providing further evidence that the aircraft’s tail probably hit the ground at this moment.

The Boeing manual warns about the aircraft’s tendency to increase the pitch attitude after touchdown and warns of the risk of keeping the nose wheel in the air.

When the aircraft captain warned of the excessive attitude reached, induced 9 because of the low speed (KIAS) on touchdown, he instructed the copilot to increase power, which he did by slightly advancing the thrust levers. The pushing of the thrust levers was insufficient to trigger the retraction of the ground spoilers (they need to be moved to 50% of their range, i.e. to the 80º position), but, as they retracted, it is considered that this could have been done manually by one of the crew members. The increase in lift produced, together with the aircraft’s 7º attitude at the time, produced a momentary 1 second ground to flight mode sensor change which coincided with a high magnitude recorded movement of the control column.

This event was identified by the copilot as a rebound and, following the instructions in the manufacturer’s manual, he decided to carry out a “go around manoeuvre” verbalizing his intentions.

At that time the captain took control of the aircraft’s controls and the ground spoilers were again extended. Pitch attitude decreased towards 0º, reaching it when the aircraft had a ground speed of 100 kt, occurring 13 seconds after touchdown was made. The landing roll continued without further incidence.

Metars:
LEAL 101200Z 10008KT 070V140 CAVOK 18/11 Q1025 NOSIG=
LEAL 101130Z 10007KT 060V150 CAVOK 18/12 Q1025 NOSIG=
LEAL 101100Z 09006KT 050V150 9999 FEW020 18/10 Q1026 NOSIG=
LEAL 101030Z 10006KT 050V150 9999 FEW020 18/11 Q1026 NOSIG=
LEAL 101000Z 09006KT 050V150 9999 FEW020 18/10 Q1026 NOSIG=
LEAL 100930Z 09005KT 050V130 9999 FEW020 18/11 Q1026 NOSIG=
LEAL 100900Z 10005KT 060V210 9999 FEW020 18/11 Q1026 NOSIG=
LEAL 100830Z 07003KT 010V120 9999 FEW018 16/11 Q1026 NOSIG=