What happened
On a scheduled flight from Frankfurt, Germany, to Montreal, Quebec, an Airbus 330-343 operated by Air Canada experienced two distinct flight anomalies. During the takeoff roll on Runway 25R, the aircraft's tail struck the runway surface. The flight crew was unaware of the strike until notified by Air Traffic Services and a cabin crew member. Following the incident, the crew requested a holding pattern and eventually decided to return to Frankfurt.
During the subsequent ILS approach to Runway 2XB, the aircraft encountered a sudden, extreme pitch-up maneuver. While established on the localizer at 4000 feet, the aircraft's nose rose to 26.7 degrees. The pilot flying eventually disconnected the autopilot and manually recovered the aircraft. The flight concluded with an overweight landing on Runway 25R, which resulted in substantial structural damage to the underside of the tail. There were no injuries to the 253 passengers or 13 crew members.
The investigation
The investigation examined the cockpit preparation, the flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data, and the integrity of the airport's ILS signal. Investigators analyzed the takeoff speeds entered into the Multipurpose Control Display Unit (MCDU) and the crew's adherence to Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). The investigation also looked into the possibility of signal interference from surface vehicles near the glide path antenna at Frankfurt Airport.
Findings
- The pilot not flying (PNF) erroneously entered a V1 speed of 126 knots into the MCDU, instead of the required 156 knots.
- This data entry error went undetected by both pilots despite multiple opportunities for cross-checking.
- Due to the incorrect speed reference, the pilot flying (PF) initiated rotation approximately 24 knots below the required speed, directly causing the tail strike.
- The aircraft's glide path signal was likely distorted by a taxiing aircraft, providing false guidance to the autopilot.
- The flight crew failed to validate the glide path interception against the approach plate information, which would have indicated they were too far from the threshold to be on the correct path.
- A lack of situational awareness and airmanship contributed to the failure to detect the incorrect speed and the delayed reaction to the pitch-up event.
- A flat authority gradient in the cockpit may have contributed to a relaxed attitude regarding the verification of flight data.