What happened
On June 6, 2001, an EMB 820C, registration PT-EFU, was performing a cargo flight from Guarapuava to Bacacheri, Brazil. The flight was operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and was carrying two crew members and one passenger. During the approach, the crew was aware of severe weather conditions, including thunderstorms, heavy rain, and gusty winds in the region.
As the aircraft approached runway 36, the pilot noted significant water accumulation on the runway. The pilot executed a landing with a relatively low approach angle, attempting to touch down before the 1,000-foot marker, and at a speed estimated between 70 and 80 knots. Upon touchdown, the pilot applied the brakes, but the aircraft failed to decelerate effectively. The pilot attempted a directional correction by applying heavy rudder, but the aircraft continued down the runway, overran the threshold, and collided with a wall belonging to the CINDACTA II facility.
The investigation
The CENIPA investigation examined the meteorological conditions, the aircraft's mechanical state, and the crew's decision-making process. Investigators found that while the aircraft was airworthy and within weight and balance limits, the runway surface was heavily contaminated with water. The investigation also noted that the pilot had previously successfully landed on the same runway under similar tailwind conditions, which may have influenced the decision to proceed despite the deteriorating weather.
Investigators also evaluated the availability of alternative airports. Afonso Pena (SBCT) was operating normally under IFR and was only a five-minute flight away, providing a much safer landing option. The investigation also looked into the crew's training regarding wet runway operations and the phenomenon of dynamic hydroplaning.
Findings
- The pilot's decision-making was compromised by overconfidence stemming from previous successful landings in similar tailwind conditions.
- The crew failed to divert to a safer alternative airport (SBCT) despite the presence of severe thunderstorms and heavy rain.
- The aircraft likely experienced dynamic hydroplaning due to the accumulation of water on the runway and the high touchdown speed.
- The use of a steep approach and higher-than-normal touchdown speed, intended to land short of the 1,000-foot mark, likely exacerbated the loss of braking effectiveness.
- The pilot's decision to continue the landing was potentially influenced by the fact that it was the final flight of the day and the company's base was located at the destination.
- The aircraft sustained serious damage and was considered a total economic loss.
- The accident resulted in one serious injury to a crew member and two light injuries to the remaining crew and passenger.