What happened
On April 27, 2006, a Cirrus SR20, registration F-HASL, was performing a local flight departing from Lognes aerodrome with the pilot and three passengers. During the approach to runway 08, air traffic control observed the aircraft flying at a speed higher than normal on short final.
The pilot attempted a three-point landing, but the aircraft bounced once. A second, harder contact with the runway caused a subsequent bounce that lifted the aircraft to the height of nearby hangars. During this sequence of bounces, a passenger requested that the pilot apply go-around power, but the pilot declined, stating he was managing the landing. After a third bounce, the pilot increased power and attempted to flare, but the aircraft made a fourth contact with the runway. Realizing the aircraft could not be stopped before the end of the runway, the pilot applied left rudder to steer the aircraft off the paved surface. The aircraft came to a stop on the grass approximately 130 meters beyond the runway threshold. The impact caused damage to the propeller, the nose gear, and the wheel fairings.
The investigation
The investigation focused on the pilot's approach speed and the handling of the aircraft during the landing sequence. It was noted that the pilot had reduced speed to approximately 75 knots on short final, which aligned with the recommended speed in the flight manual. However, the investigation established that the pilot's control inputs during the initial bounces likely contributed to the subsequent hard impact. Specifically, the pilot likely applied a nose-down input during the first bounce, leading to a high vertical velocity upon the second contact.
Additionally, the investigation examined the specific landing gear characteristics of the Cirrus SR20, noting that its design incorporates a degree of elasticity to accommodate the potential use of a recovery parachute, a property that contributed to the aircraft remaining airborne through the initial bounces. The pilot's experience on this specific type was limited to 10.5 hours, with only 2 hours completed in the three months preceding the accident.
Findings
- Improper speed management during the final approach phase.
- Insufficient mastery of the technique required to recover from a missed flare or bounced landing.
- The unique elasticity of the aircraft's landing gear contributed to the persistence of the bouncing sequence.