No fatalities

7 Jun 2023: DASSAULT-BREGUET FALCON 10 (N87RT) — Aviation Development Group — Panama City, FL

Panama City, FL, United States

On 7 Jun 2023, a DASSAULT-BREGUET FALCON 10 (registration N87RT) operated by Aviation Development Group was involved in an aviation accident near Panama City, FL. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: The flight crew’s failure to appropriately configure the airplane for landing, which resulted in a failed attempt to utilize the thrust reversers during landing and the inability to stop the airplane using its brakes due to increased forward thrust. This summary draws on records from NTSB; 4 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

SourcesNTSBPrimary reportUpdated 1778583330Data APIEditorial standards

On June 6, 2023, a Dassault-Breguet Falcon 10 (N87RT) was substantially damaged after landing at a Florida airport when thrust reversers failed to deploy and brakes were ineffective, leading to a runway excursion. No injuries were reported among the three crew and two passengers.

Accident Details

On June 6, 2023, at approximately 2017 central daylight time, a Dassault-Breguet Falcon 10, registration N87RT, sustained substantial damage during a landing accident near Panama City, Florida. The airplane was operating as a personal flight under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The pilot, copilot, and three passengers were not injured.

The flight originated from Cobb County International Airport (RYY), Atlanta, Georgia, at about 1932, destined for Northwest Florida Beaches International Airport (ECP), Panama City. The pilot reported that all aircraft systems functioned normally during taxi, takeoff, and en route. The crew prepared for a straight-in instrument landing system approach to runway 16 at ECP under night visual meteorological conditions. Landing gear and flaps extended normally, and hydraulic pressures and quantities were within normal ranges.

The pilot stated that the airplane touched down approximately 2,500 feet from the approach end of the 10,000-foot runway. He deployed airbrakes (speed brakes) and placed both engines into reverse idle. The thrust reversers did not deploy, and a system disagree horn annunciated. Normal braking produced no deceleration. The copilot also attempted braking with no effect. The pilot then engaged the emergency brake in two stages, but neither stage provided braking force. Attempts to recycle brakes and thrust reversers were unsuccessful. The pilot decided not to abort the landing because he was uncertain of the thrust reverser position and the airplane was nearing the runway end. He tried to shut down both engines using the throttles but could not because the thrust reverser handles were still raised.

The pilot did not instruct the copilot to pull the fire handles as an alternate engine shutdown method, citing distraction from approaching obstacles as the airplane left the prepared runway surface. Using rudder, he maneuvered between two runway approach lighting support poles, but the wings struck the poles, damaging the inboard wing sections back to both engine inlets. The airplane then bounced over a grass mound and entered deep, soft sand, causing the landing gear to collapse. After coming to rest, the pilot moved the throttles to cut off the engines. All occupants exited uneventfully. The pilot used the cockpit fire extinguisher to put out a small fire on the left wing; airport fire and rescue personnel arrived shortly after.

Postaccident Findings

Following the accident, the pilot photographed the cockpit and observed that the thrust reverser emergency stow switches were in the unguarded, up/stow position. He expressed surprise, noting he had never forgotten to cycle these switches back to normal during previous pre-taxi checks. The operator's chief pilot confirmed that the disagree horn would sound only when the thrust reversers were in the stow configuration and an attempt was made to deploy them. The pilot later described that with the stow switches in STOW, pulling the reverse levers to higher RPM would result in increased forward thrust, overwhelming the braking system.

Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed crush damage to the leading edges of both wings and slats. Slats were extended, flight spoilers/speed brakes deployed, flaps fully extended, and the left inboard flap partially separated. The mid-spar was damaged. Horizontal and vertical stabilizers, rudder, and elevator were undamaged. Both engines' forward fan blades showed foreign object debris damage. The nose and right main landing gear collapsed; the left main landing gear broke in half at the oleo strut and separated. No preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures were identified.

The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was recovered and sent to the NTSB Recorders Laboratory. The tape was severed and distorted but was repaired and digitized. The recording contained communications using the callsign N20CF, the aircraft's prior registration changed in 2017; thus, the audio was from 2017 or earlier and not pertinent to the accident.

The thrust reversers were installed under a supplemental type certificate (STC). The Airplane Flight Manual Supplement included a checklist item for reverser throttles in STOW POSITION and the emergency stow switch guard DOWN. The cockpit checklist found was marked "For Training Purposes Only" and for an airplane without thrust reversers.

Contributing factors

Incorrect use/operationFlight crew