What happened
On 1 October 2006, an Airbus A320-232, registration HA-LPB, was conducting a passenger flight from Warsaw to London (Luton) Airport. During the approach, the commander elected to fly the aircraft manually, disconnecting the autopilot, autothrust, and flight directors.
As the aircraft descended through 1,000 ft agl, the crew encountered significant turbulence, with winds measured at approximately 40 kt from the south-west. The aircraft's profile became unstable; at 530 ft agl, the aircraft was significantly above the required glideslope. While the crew attempted to re-establish the correct path, the airspeed decayed to approximately 130 kt, which was below the required approach speed.
During the flare at 50 ft agl, the commander applied full aft sidestick input. The aircraft touched down firmly and bounced. During this bounce, the aircraft maintained a high pitch attitude, and a second touchdown occurred. This sequence resulted in a tailstrike, causing abrasion marks on the lower fuselage skin and adjacent frames.
The investigation
The AAIB investigation examined the flight data recorder, cockpit voice recorder, and the aircraft's Data Management Unit, which had generated an exceedance report. The investigation confirmed that the vertical load factor on landing was 2.29g.
Investigators reviewed the aircraft's maintenance history and the manufacturer's technical data regarding tailstrike risks. The investigation also looked into the crew's handling of the unstable approach and the subsequent reporting procedures. It was noted that while the commander reported the incident to the company, Air Traffic Control was not immediately notified of the tailstrike.
Findings
- The primary cause of the tailstrike was the aircraft's high pitch attitude and low airspeed during the landing phase.
- The approach was unstable, as the aircraft was well above the glideslope at 530 ft agl and below the target approach speed at touchdown.
- The decision to fly the approach manually, without the assistance of flight directors or autothrust, increased the workload of the crew during turbulent conditions.
- The crew's inputs during the bounce, specifically the non-handling pilot's aft sidestick movement, were noted, though the handling pilot's input was the dominant factor.
- The aircraft's descent rate was high at the time of touchdown.