What happened
On September 2, 2010, EVA Air flight BR701, a B747-400 with registration B-16410, arrived at Taoyuan International Airport from Shanghai Pudong. The flight, carrying 281 passengers and 16 crew members, was landing on runway 24 during a period of rain and crosswinds. During the landing roll, the aircraft experienced a leftward deviation from the runway centerline. The aircraft drifted onto the runway shoulder and grass before returning to the pavement, eventually coming to a stop on taxiway S2. Because the tail of the aircraft remained partially within the runway holding position markings, a subsequent aircraft was permitted to land, resulting in a Category C runway incursion. The aircraft sustained damage to the left landing gear, wing, flaps, and fuselage skin, and several runway lights were destroyed. There were no injuries among the passengers or crew.
The investigation
The investigation examined the aircraft's flight data, weather records, and cockpit voice recordings. Investigators analyzed the landing performance under wet runway conditions and crosswind components. The investigation also reviewed the communication between the flight crew and air traffic control, specifically regarding the reporting of the aircraft's position relative to the runway holding lines. Additionally, the inspection of the airfield revealed issues with runway surface maintenance, including uneven pavement transitions and insufficient drainage in certain areas, which contributed to the accumulation of water.
Findings
- The aircraft landed with a leftward trend and a landing attitude that favored the downwind side due to the crosswind and wet surface.
- After touchdown, the combination of increasing crosswinds and the aircraft's existing leftward momentum caused the aircraft to continue deviating from the centerline.
- Reduced friction between the tires and the wet pavement, likely exacerbated by the aircraft's weight not being fully settled on the wheels immediately after touchdown, diminished the effectiveness of the rudder and nose-wheel steering.
- The flight crew failed to use standard terminology for the transfer of control between the pilot flying and the pilot monitoring during the excursion.
- The pilot provided inaccurate information to air traffic control, stating the aircraft had cleared the runway when the tail was still within the runway boundaries.
- The air traffic controller failed to provide the most recent wind shear warnings to the crew via ATIS or direct communication.
- The airport's surface maintenance and drainage infrastructure contributed to the wet and slippery conditions on the runway.