What aircraft was involved and where did it happen?

The accident on 2004-03-21 involved a Boeing B737-800, at Hannover, DE.

What was the probable cause of the accident?

The primary cause of the hard landing was the failure to effectively counteract turbulence during the final approach and the decision not to execute a go-around despite significant instability in the descent.

Hard Landing of Boeing 737-800 at Hannover Airport

A Boeing 737-800 experienced a series of hard impacts during landing at Hannover due to uncorrected turbulence, resulting in minor aircraft damage.

What happened

On March 21, 2004, a Boeing 737-800 arriving from London-Stansted was landing on runway 27L at Hannover Airport. The flight, carrying 164 passengers and 6 crew members, encountered strong, gusty westerly winds and predicted moderate turbulence during the final approach. To account for the wind, the landing speed was increased to 148 knots.

As the aircraft descended below 200 ft, it began to deviate from the 3-degree glidepath, initially climbing due to a pitch increase. The pilot responded with an increased sink rate, but the aircraft failed to stabilize. The aircraft made an initial hard touchdown on both main gears, which caused it to bounce. During this bounce, the aircraft entered a 10-degree left bank and struck the ground a second time, impacting with the left main gear and the nose gear. A third impact occurred as the aircraft settled on all three landing gears with a heavy vertical acceleration. Following the landing, inspections revealed damage to the left engine cowling and the left nose gear wheel.

The investigation

The BFU examined flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data, as well as maintenance and training records. The investigation analyzed the aircraft's flight path, vertical acceleration, and the meteorological conditions at the time of the event. The BFU also reviewed the pilot's training history and the approach briefing conducted by the crew.

Findings

The final landing impact reached a vertical acceleration of 2.6 g, exceeding the maximum allowable limit of 2.5 g.
The approach was highly unstable below 400 ft, with sink rates fluctuating significantly between 300 ft/min and 1,100 ft/min.
Turbulence in the final approach was not effectively compensated for by the pilot.
The crew failed to initiate a go-around despite the significant deviations in sink rate and glidepath.
The approach briefing failed to explicitly address the expected turbulence or the necessary contingency measures.
Training records indicated that the pilot had previously demonstrated difficulties with approach and landing stability during simulator training.

Safety action

The airline arranged additional simulator training for the co-pilot, specifically focusing on approach and landing procedures. Furthermore, specific landing training for B737 type-rating and recurrent training was integrated into the company's Operations Manual, Part D.