A Cessna 525B CitationJet CJ3 corporate jet sustained substantial damage in a runway excursion accident at S?o Paulo-Congonhas Airport, SP (CGH), Brazil. The captain suffered serious injuries while the co-pilot and passenger suffered minor injuries. The airplane landed at high speed on the second third of runway 35R. Runway length remaining was approximately between 700 and 750 meters, while the aircraft would have needed 826 meters to stop. The aircraft overran the runway, bounced down a slope and crashed at the perimeter fence near Avenida dos Bandeirantes. Individual information a) Attitude – contributed The commander was overconfident in himself and the aircraft which led him to lose the critical capacity to discern the risks involved in the procedure that was adopting. Corroborating was the fact that the pilot judged he had much knowledge in this operation and knew exactly how the aircraft responded. It can be inferred there was complacency by the copilot on the actions of the commander, during the approach at high speed, because even feeling uncomfortable, he did not make an incisive interference because he believed in the idea that the commander had done this kind of approach, with high speed, and so knowing what he was doing. b) Perception – contributed The pilot failed to identify the location of touch down during landing and not knowing how much runway was remaining, he decided he should not rush, thus demonstrating low situational awareness and lack of awareness, impacting the proper reaction time for the situation (Rush), which was not performed , leading the occurrence in question. c) Decision-making – contributed The crew failed to properly assess the information available like speed and the runway length for the realization of a safe landing, which led to a poor judgment of the situation at hand, making the decision not to adopt the missed approach procedure. 3.2.1.2.2 Information Psychosocial a) Communication – contributed The distance between the crew, caused unconsciously by the commander’s position with excess knowledge in the operation and the aircraft, and the insecurity of the copilot in considering new and inexperienced, resulted in a lack of assertiveness of the copilot to inform, with little emphasis, the commander of his perception of excessive airspeed. b) Team Dynamics – contributed The crew did not adopt good crew resource management, failing to communicate with assertiveness and share critical information in time prior to landing, allowing the speeding remained present until the touchdown. Concerning the operation of the aircraft a) Application of commands – contributed Despite having adequate experience and training, the commander did not use the resources available, such as speed brakes to reduce the aircraft approach speed. b) Adverse weather conditions – unspecified The variable wind direction and predominantly tail intensity equal to or greater than 10 knots, allowed excessive speed during landing. c) Cockpit coordination – contributed The crew did not adopt good crew resource management, allowing the high speed to remain present until the touchdown. d) Pilot judgement – contributed The commander thought he would be able to perform the approach and landing with the speed above the expected.