A Beechcraft Beechjet 400A, PT-WHF, sustained substantial damage in a landing accident at S?o Jos‚ dos Campos Airport, Brazil. Both pilots were not injured. The aircraft departed S?o Paulo-Congonhas Airport for a repositioning flight to S?o Jos‚ dos Campos with the copilot under training as Pilot Flying. The captain however, was not a qualified instructor. The aircraft was passing Decision Height during the approach to runway 15 when the captain took over control with the intention of correcting the glide slope for landing. A loss of lift during this maneuver caused the right wing and then the right main landing gear to touch the ground before the runway. Both suffered substantial damage as the aircraft ran onto the runway. Psychological aspects: a) Improvisation – contributed The captain demonstrated improvisation in the absence of a briefing before the start of the flight, stating, on the way to the aircraft, that the copilot was to be Pilot Flying, and failing to consider that the co-pilot was still in the instruction phase. Operational Aspect a) Application of commands – contributed By assuming the command, the captain acted very firm on the controls, excessively pitching the aircraft and at the same time reducing the engine power. When recovering, this allowed the aircraft to lose lift and, therefore, the tip of the wing and the landing gear touched the ground before the runway, causing severe structural damage. b) Cockpit coordination – contributed The flight proceeded normally until the moment that the captain judged that the co-pilot kept the aircraft above the glide path. From that moment there is an evident lack of coordination between flight crew. c) Education – contributed The training provided by the company suggested a lack of standardization of procedures, despite the existence of a manual adopted by the Operations Sector. Although they met the ground and flight training program, both pilots failed to carry out training in flying simulator within the period stipulated by law. They also did not hold a briefing before the flight. d) Pilot judgement – contributed By assuming the command, the captain inadequately assessed the necessary corrections, leading the aircraft to stall. e) Little experience – Undetermined The copilot was in the initial instruction stage, having little experience in flying the aircraft. f) Management Supervision – contributed The Operations Sector did not properly manage the flight operations, in order to prevent a copilot in early instruction stage, to operate the aircraft without the presence of a qualified instructor by the company. The company allowed the crew to fly without making the flight simulator training, as envisaged in the legislation.