On October 26, 2023, at approximately 06:47:40, FedEx Flight 80 experienced a significant incident during landing at Narita International Airport, Japan. The aircraft contacted Narita Tower and received a landing clearance for runway 34L. Wind information indicated gusting winds. As the airplane was flying through rough air, the autopilot and autothrottol struggled to maintain airspeed and attitude. The pilot monitoring called ?stabilize? and likely allowed the pilot flying to continue approaching, disregarding airspeed deviation exceeding Vapp plus 10 kt. The autopilot was disconnected at 198 ft radio altitude, while the autothrottol remained engaged. The pitch angle decreased from 1.4ø to 0.4ø during the descent, and the CAS fluctuated from 178.5 kts to 179 kts. This exceeded the stabilized approach criteria. The pilot monitoring reported a 500 ft. range on the CAS, and the CAS was about 179 kts. The pilot was attempting to correct the lowered flight path. The autopilot was disconnected, and the autothrottol remained engaged. The pitch angle then decreased from 1.4ø to 0.4ø during the descent, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased as low as 0.4ø but increased to 3.5ø by the time the airplane descended to 92 ft. The CAS decreased as low as 154 ft (Vapp minus 10 kt) and the airplane descended about half a dot below the glide slope. The pilot was attempting to correct the cross wind component from the left and align the longitudinal axis with the runway centerline. The pilot flying initiated the flare later than usual at 20 ft, not at 30 ft. Rapid and large column input during flare indicated the pilot’s recognition of the late flare. The pitch angle remained 1.1ø (about 2ø lower than usual) until the flare, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased to 0.7ø (below 20 ft) followed by the quick increment of the pitch angle to 4.6ø in 2 seconds before touchdown. The control column was pushed largely forward (-4.9ø) just before the touchdown. The airplane consequently experienced a large sink rate upon the first touchdown as high as 7 fps. Vertical acceleration spiked to 1.63 G and the airplane bounced. The forward control column input just before and during the touchdown most likely resulted in the rapid derotation from 4.6ø at the first touchdown to below zero in 1.5 seconds. The pitch angle remained 1.1ø (about 2ø lower than usual) until the flare, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased to 0.7ø (below 20 ft) followed by the quick increment of the pitch angle to 4.6ø in 2 seconds before touchdown. The control column was pushed largely forward (-4.9ø) just before the touchdown. The airplane then touched down on the nose landing gear with a pitch angle of -1.8ø, followed by the main landing gear. After touchdown the nosegear rebounded off quickly increasing the pitch angle, leading to increased lift, resulting in a high bounce to 16 ft above the runway. The nose dropped again and the airplane landed on the nosegear followed by the main landing gears. As the airplane rolled to the left, the left main gear first touched down, followed by the center landing gear and the right main gear. The recorded vertical acceleration at this time was 3.06 G. The airplane sink rate was estimated to be 21.5 fps at the third touchdown. It is highly probable that the airplane’s kinetic energies at the third touchdown exceeded the certification requirements by almost seven times. The left wing attachment point to the fuselage fractured. The fuselage rolled to the left with the lift generated by the right wing and a fire erupted. The airplane rolled inverted and was consumed by fire. PROBABLE CAUSES: The incident is likely attributable to a combination of factors. The primary cause is a combination of the pilot’s actions during the landing sequence, specifically the delayed flare and the subsequent pitch angle adjustment, which contributed to the rapid descent and subsequent loss of control. The combination of the gusty wind conditions created a challenging approach, resulting in a large sink rate. The autopilot disconnection and the subsequent loss of control were also significant contributing factors. The pilot’s decision to continue approaching despite the airspeed deviation, and the subsequent pitch angle adjustment, likely exacerbated the situation. The potential for a fire to develop and spread, leading to the aircraft’s rapid descent and subsequent combustion, is also a contributing factor. The MTF’s guidance regarding the initial pitch angle and subsequent maneuver was insufficient to adequately mitigate the risk.On October 26, 2023, at approximately 06:47:40, FedEx Flight 80 experienced a significant incident during landing at Narita International Airport, Japan. The aircraft contacted Narita Tower and received a landing clearance for runway 34L. Wind information indicated gusting winds. As the airplane was flying through rough air, the autopilot and autothrottol struggled to maintain airspeed and attitude. The pilot monitoring called ?stabilize? and likely allowed the pilot flying to continue approaching, disregarding airspeed deviation exceeding Vapp plus 10 kt. The autopilot was disconnected at 198 ft radio altitude, while the autothrottol remained engaged. The pitch angle decreased from 1.4ø to 0.4ø during the descent, and the CAS fluctuated from 178.5 kts to 179 kts. This exceeded the stabilized approach criteria. The pilot monitoring reported a 500 ft. range on the CAS, and the CAS was about 179 kts. The pilot was attempting to correct the lowered flight path. The autopilot was disconnected, and the autothrottol remained engaged. The pitch angle then decreased from 1.4ø to 0.4ø during the descent, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased as low as 0.4ø but increased to 3.5ø by the time the airplane descended to 92 ft. The CAS decreased as low as 154 ft (Vapp minus 10 kt) and the airplane descended about half a dot below the glide slope. The pilot was attempting to correct the cross wind component from the left and align the longitudinal axis with the runway centerline. The pilot flying initiated the flare later than usual at 20 ft, not at 30 ft. Rapid and large column input during flare indicated the pilot’s recognition of the late flare. The pitch angle remained 1.1ø (about 2ø lower than usual) until the flare, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased to 0.7ø (below 20 ft) followed by the quick increment of the pitch angle to 4.6ø in 2 seconds before touchdown. The control column was pushed largely forward (-4.9ø) just before the touchdown. The airplane consequently experienced a large sink rate upon the first touchdown as high as 7 fps. Vertical acceleration spiked to 1.63 G and the airplane bounced. The forward control column input just before and during the touchdown most likely resulted in the rapid derotation from 4.6ø at the first touchdown to below zero in 1.5 seconds. The pitch angle remained 1.1ø (about 2ø lower than usual) until the flare, and the pitch angle temporarily decreased to 0.7ø (below 20 ft) followed by the quick increment of the pitch angle to 4.6ø in 2 seconds before touchdown. The control column was pushed largely forward (-4.9ø) just before the touchdown. The airplane then touched down on the nose landing gear with a pitch angle of -1.8ø, followed by the main landing gear. After touchdown the nosegear rebounded off quickly increasing the pitch angle, leading to increased lift, resulting in a high bounce to 16 ft above the runway. The nose dropped again and the airplane landed on the nosegear followed by the main landing gears. As the airplane rolled to the left, the left main gear first touched down, followed by the center landing gear and the right main gear. The recorded vertical acceleration at this time was 3.06 G. The airplane sink rate was estimated to be 21.5 fps at the third touchdown. It is highly probable that the airplane’s kinetic energies at the third touchdown exceeded the certification requirements by almost seven times. The left wing attachment point to the fuselage fractured. The fuselage rolled to the left with the lift generated by the right wing and a fire erupted. The airplane rolled inverted and was consumed by fire. PROBABLE CAUSES: The incident is likely attributable to a combination of factors. The primary cause is a combination of the pilot’s actions during the landing sequence, specifically the delayed flare and the subsequent pitch angle adjustment, which contributed to the rapid descent and subsequent loss of control. The combination of the gusty wind conditions created a challenging approach, resulting in a large sink rate. The autopilot disconnection and the subsequent loss of control were also significant contributing factors. The pilot’s decision to continue approaching despite the airspeed deviation, and the subsequent pitch angle adjustment, likely exacerbated the situation. The potential for a fire to develop and spread, leading to the aircraft’s rapid descent and subsequent combustion, is also a contributing factor. The MTF’s guidance regarding the initial pitch angle and subsequent maneuver was insufficient to adequately mitigate the risk.