What happened
On June 18, 2012, a Beechcraft 400A, registration N826JH, was on a visual approach to runway 20L at Dekalb-Peable Airport (PDK) in Atlanta, Georgia. The flight, operated by N79TE, LLC, had originated from Gadsden, Alabama.
During the approach, the flight crew was notified by air traffic control of a Cessna airplane on a nearby approach. Although instructed to maintain altitude until the traffic was in sight, the crew performed a descent. The pilots also experienced several aural warnings from the Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS), including "sink rate" and "pull up" alerts.
The aircraft touched down at a high rate of speed. Witnesses and radar data indicated the airplane was traveling at approximately 194 knots at a point near the runway threshold, significantly exceeding the calculated landing speed. After touchdown, the aircraft failed to decelerate sufficiently, overran the runway, and exited the departure end of the pavement. The aircraft struck terrain, causing substantial damage to the airframe. The pilot-in-command and co-pilot sustained 2 serious injuries, and two passengers sustained 2 minor injuries. There were 0 fatalities.
The investigation
Investigators examined the wreckage and found the nose and left main landing gears had separated from the aircraft. While the pilot-in-command reported that the brakes failed to respond, the investigation of the brake and antiskid systems showed no evidence of malfunction. Instead, investigators determined the lack of deceleration was likely due to the aircraft being at an excessive airspeed with the flaps retracted, which resulted in a light weight-on-wheels condition and reduced braking effectiveness.
Analysis of the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) revealed that the flight crew did not use a formal challenge-and-response method for several checklists, including the after-takeoff and descent checklists. The investigation also noted that the transfer of control from the second-in-command to the pilot-in-command during the approach was not explicitly verbalized.
Findings
- The flight crew failed to establish the proper landing airspeed, leading to a touchdown at a speed that made stopping within the remaining runway distance impossible.
- The crew did not initiate a go-around despite recognizing the excessive airspeed, the high rate of descent, and the EGPWS warnings.
- The flight crew exhibited poor crew resource management (CRM), characterized by inadequate communication, lack of monitoring, and diminished situational awareness.
- The second-in-command's lack of proficiency in the aircraft type contributed to pilot distraction and reduced situational awareness.