No fatalities

2016-03-14: Beechcraft Beechjet 400 (N465FL) — Flight Options — Rome-Richard B. Russell, United States of America

Rome-Richard B. Russell, United States of AmericaLanding (descent or approach)

On March 14, 2016, a Beechcraft Beechjet 400 (registration N465FL) operated by Flight Options was involved in an aviation accident near Rome-Richard B. Russell, United States of America during landing or approach. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: The pilots’ failure to use available sources of wind information before landing and recognize cues indicating the presence of the tailwind and conduct a go-around, which resulted in their landing with a significant tailwind and a subsequent runway overrun. This summary draws on records from the Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A); 2 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

Sourcesthe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A)Primary reportUpdated 1781192524Data APIEditorial standards

During a positioning flight, a business jet overran runway 7 after landing with a significant tailwind. The pilots failed to recognize wind cues and did not execute a go-around. The nose landing gear collapsed, resulting in substantial damage.

Summary

A business jet conducting a cross-country positioning flight overran the departure end of runway 7 after landing. The nose landing gear collapsed during the overrun, causing substantial damage to the airframe. Both pilots reported that they did not feel the brakes or antiskid system working, but post-accident testing revealed no preaccident mechanical malfunctions.

Sequence of Events

The flight was uneventful until the landing. While descending through 18,000 ft, the pilot monitoring received the automated weather report from the destination airport, indicating variable wind at 6 knots, gusting to 17 knots. The pilot flying programmed the flight management system for a visual approach to runway 7 and briefed reference speeds based on airplane weight. During the left descending turn to base leg, the PF overshot final approach and had to turn back toward the centerline, reporting that the airplane was being pushed by the winds. At about 500 ft above ground level (agl), both pilots acknowledged the approach was stabilized while airspeed fluctuated between 112 and 115 knots. At about 200 ft agl, both pilots noticed the airplane beginning to descend and airspeed decreasing. The PF added power. During the last 200 ft, the wind was described as gusty with a left crosswind; ground speed seemed very fast, and excessive power was required. At 75 to 100 ft agl, the PF asked for wind information; the PM reported variable 6 gusting 17 knots. Both pilots noted very fast ground speed but continued. Neither pilot reported seeing the windsock. The PF stated the airplane touched down abruptly at Vref+5. He applied brakes, and the PM applied speed brakes. Neither felt deceleration, so the PF applied harder pressure and then full braking. When runway departure was evident, the PM applied emergency brakes, feeling some deceleration, but the airplane overran the runway, traveling through grass and mud for about 370 ft before stopping. The NLG collapsed, causing the forward fuselage to strike the ground.

Weather Information

Review of airport automated weather data recorded about 3 minutes before landing revealed wind from 240° at 16 knots, gusting to 26 knots. This would have resulted in a 3- to 5-knot crosswind and 16- to 26-knot tailwind. Under these conditions, the landing distance would have been about 4,175 ft per the unfactored performance chart. Tire skid marks began about 1,000 ft from the approach end of runway 7.

Post-Accident Examination

Examination of the airplane found the NLG collapsed and substantial airframe damage. Post-accident testing of the brake and antiskid systems showed no evidence of preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures; they functioned as designed. Given the tire skid marks and component examination, the braking system likely operated nominally during the landing.

Probable Cause

The pilots’ failure to use available sources of wind information before landing and recognize cues indicating the presence of the tailwind and conduct a go-around, which resulted in their landing with a significant tailwind and a subsequent runway overrun.