What happened
On August 17, 2012, an Embraer ERJ-190, registration B-16825, operated by China Airlines Express, was performing a scheduled passenger flight (AE369) from Taipei Songshan Airport to Magong Airport. During the approach, the crew received updated weather information indicating that conditions no longer met the standard for the runway 20 approach. After waiting for updated information, the crew proceeded with the landing using a Flaps 5 configuration and medium autobrake setting.
Upon touchdown on runway 20, the aircraft began to veer toward the left side of the runway. During the landing roll, the aircraft exited the paved surface and entered the grass area, striking several utility manholes. The impact with a runway edge light manhole caused the nose landing gear to collapse. There were 110 people on board, including 104 passengers and 6 crew members; all occupants survived the incident without injury.
The investigation
The Taiwan Transportation Safety Board (TTSB) examined the flight data, maintenance records, and airport infrastructure. The investigation focused on the crew's landing technique, the aircraft's performance configuration, and the runway environment. Investigators analyzed the aircraft's braking performance, the presence of standing water, and the suitability of the airport's drainage structures and runway slope. The investigation also reviewed the airline's operating manuals regarding landing distance calculations for wet runways and standard operating procedures for touchdown.
Findings
- The crew performed an incorrectly managed flare, initiating a premature pitch-up and failing to reduce thrust at the appropriate time, which resulted in a touchdown significantly beyond the runway threshold.
- The crew failed to execute a go-around or a rejected landing despite the high-risk conditions identified in the pre-landing checklists.
- The crew did not utilize the Flaps Full configuration, which is recommended by the manufacturer for landings on wet or heavy/short runways.
- The airline's operating manuals lacked specific procedures for calculating landing distances on wet runways and did not include a 15% safety margin for such conditions.
- The airport's drainage infrastructure, specifically the placement of manholes and unlevelled ditches in the runway safety area, contributed to the severity of the gear damage when the aircraft exited the pavement.
- The aircraft did not actually experience hydroplaning, despite the crew's belief that it had occurred.