Airbus A321-131 – D-AIRE

Incident Overview

Date: Monday 9 October 2000

Aircraft Type: Airbus A321-131

Owner/operator: Lufthansa

Registration Number: D-AIRE

Location: London-Heathrow Airport (LHR) – ÿ United Kingdom

Phase of Flight: Landing

Status: Substantial, repaired

Casualties: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 178

Component Affected: Aircraft Control System (specifically, the Autopilot and Sidestick control system) and Flight Director system.Aircraft Control System (specifically, the Autopilot and Sidestick control system) and Flight Director system.

Investigating Agency: AAIBAAIB

Category: Accident

On October 9, 2000, an A320 aircraft from Stuttgart to Frankfurt experienced a landing with a significant tailscrape due to a rapid descent triggered by a high rate of descent following a change in cruising level. The flight began with the crew changing to the A321 for London, utilizing ATIS information for Runway 27 Left. Initial conditions included turbulent weather, a surface wind of 180/18øG, 5,000m rain, limited visibility (FEW at 1,100ft), BKN at 1300ft, OVC at 1,800ft, temperature +12øC, dew point +11øC, QNH 992, and a FO briefing regarding the approach and crew discussion of conditions. The commander initiated a controlled descent, agreed to a positive landing given the wet runway surface, and utilized autopilot to manage speed. Approximately 1,000 feet, the FO de-selected the auto-pilot, and the commander initiated a ‘sink rate’ call, leading to a rapid descent of 1,100 feet per minute. The commander applied full aft stidestick to cushion the landing, resulting in a nose-down landing. The aircraft bounced, and the FO neutralised the sidestick, resulting in a second aft stidestick application. The PFD displayed a nose-up attitude of 10 degrees, and the GPWS alerted to a ‘sink rate’ alert. The commander then applied a substantial amount of aft stidestick to mitigate the landing, resulting in a second stidestick application. The tailscrape was exacerbated by gusty crosswind conditions, leading to significant pitch changes throughout the approach. The initial pitch correction, while intended to cushion the landing, was unsuccessful in time, despite the commander’s full aft stidestick application.On October 9, 2000, an A320 aircraft from Stuttgart to Frankfurt experienced a landing with a significant tailscrape due to a rapid descent triggered by a high rate of descent following a change in cruising level. The flight began with the crew changing to the A321 for London, utilizing ATIS information for Runway 27 Left. Initial conditions included turbulent weather, a surface wind of 180/18øG, 5,000m rain, limited visibility (FEW at 1,100ft), BKN at 1300ft, OVC at 1,800ft, temperature +12øC, dew point +11øC, QNH 992, and a FO briefing regarding the approach and crew discussion of conditions. The commander initiated a controlled descent, agreed to a positive landing given the wet runway surface, and utilized autopilot to manage speed. Approximately 1,000 feet, the FO de-selected the auto-pilot, and the commander initiated a ‘sink rate’ call, leading to a rapid descent of 1,100 feet per minute. The commander applied full aft stidestick to cushion the landing, resulting in a nose-down landing. The aircraft bounced, and the FO neutralised the sidestick, resulting in a second aft stidestick application. The PFD displayed a nose-up attitude of 10 degrees, and the GPWS alerted to a ‘sink rate’ alert. The commander then applied a substantial amount of aft stidestick to mitigate the landing, resulting in a second stidestick application. The tailscrape was exacerbated by gusty crosswind conditions, leading to significant pitch changes throughout the approach. The initial pitch correction, while intended to cushion the landing, was unsuccessful in time, despite the commander’s full aft stidestick application.

Description

On 9 October 2000 the crew flew an A320 from Stuttgart to Frankfurt with the commander handling. At Frankfurt the crew changed aircraft to the A321 for the flight to London. The flight was uneventful with the only difference from that planned was a change of cruising level due to turbulence. Prior to arrival at the Lambourne hold the commander obtained ATIS information ‘India’ which for Runway 27 Left was: surface wind 180ø/18 gusting 27 kt, 5,000 meters in rain with cloud FEW at 1,100 feet, BKN at 1300 feet, OVC at 1,800 feet, temperature +12øC, dew point +11øC and QNH 992 runway wet. The FO briefed the approach and the crew discussed the conditions. It was agreed that the FO would fly the approach and make a positive landing given the wet runway surface. The aircraft’s landing weight was 72,999 Kg. Radar vectors were provided by ATC to position the aircraft onto the final approach for Runway 27 Left. The crew used the autopilot coupled to the Flight Director in managed speed mode. At about 1,000 feet the FO de-selected the auto-throttle and, with the approach stabilised at 570 feet, the auto-pilot was disconnected. At approximately 500 feet the commander called that they were ‘coming low’ meaning below the glide path, to which the FO reacted by slightly increasing nose up pitch and thus reducing the rate of descent. The commander estimated the height to have been 300 feet when he saw the Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) displaying three white lights and one red light and shortly afterwards he noticed the rate of descent was high. He looked inside the flight deck and saw a rate of descent of 1,100 feet per minute and called ‘sink rate’. Almost immediately the Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) sounded a Mode 1 alert of ‘sink rate’. Seeing the rate of descent was still high the commander applied full aft sidestick to cushion the landing. He did not depress the takeover push button on his sidestick but, as the aircraft bounced, he neutralised his sidestick and as the aircraft touched down a second time, he again applied a large amount of aft sidestick to lower the nose landing gear gently. At that point he noticed that the Primary Flight Display (PFD) showed a nose up attitude of some 10ø. Neither pilot recalled hearing the normal voice height calls from 50 feet or the voice call of ‘RETARD ‘. Believing there may have been a tail scrape the commander asked the rear cabin attendants if they had noticed anything. They described a rattling noise but thought that it had come from the galley. After shut down the commander inspected the tail area and discovered the damage caused by the tail scrape. The aircraft suffered a tailscrape whilst landing in gusty cross wind conditions. The latter stages of the approach included significant changes in pitch. The rate of descent resulting from a final pitch down correction applied by the FO could not be arrested in time, although the commander applied almost full aft sidestick.

Primary Cause

Rapid descent triggered by a high rate of descent following a change in cruising level, exacerbated by gusty crosswind conditions, likely due to a combination of pilot error and environmental factors.Rapid descent triggered by a high rate of descent following a change in cruising level, exacerbated by gusty crosswind conditions, likely due to a combination of pilot error and environmental factors.

Share on: