What happened
On September 30, 2017, an Airbus A320-214 operating a flight from Düsseldorf to Sylt overran the end of runway 32 at Sylt Airport. During the approach, the pilot flying instructed the copilot to add a 5-knot buffer to the calculated approach speed (VAPP) in the aircraft's performance menu. This instruction was not accompanied by an explanation.
The aircraft approached the runway with a significant ground speed of approximately 163 kt, which was considerably higher than the calculated VAPP of 131 kt. The aircraft experienced an extended flare and a late touchdown, hitting the runway approximately 930 meters beyond the threshold. Following touchdown, the pilot deactivated the auto-brake system by applying manual braking pressure. The aircraft continued to roll past the end of the runway, traveling roughly 8 and 80 meters onto a grassy area before coming to a stop. The incident resulted in no injuries to the passengers or crew, though a runway light was damaged.
The investigation
The BFU investigation examined the flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) to reconstruct the approach and landing sequence. Investigators analyzed the aircraft's braking performance, the runway surface conditions, and the crew's decision-making process. The investigation also reviewed the airline's operating manuals regarding stabilized approach criteria and standard operating procedures for go-around maneuvers. The BFU also evaluated the runway's drainage and the presence of rubber deposits on the pavement.
Findings
- The primary contributing factor was the failure to initiate a go-around despite the unstable approach conditions.
- The pilot flying's decision to increase the approach speed by 5 knots without updating the required landing distance calculation significantly increased the necessary stopping distance.
- The aircraft's high approach speed led to an extended flare and a touchdown far beyond the designated touchdown zone.
- The runway surface was contaminated with standing water, which, combined with existing rubber deposits, reduced braking effectiveness.
- The crew failed to perform a sufficient risk assessment regarding the narrow safety margin (calculated at only 130 meters) given the wet runway conditions.
- The copilot, acting as pilot monitoring, did not utilize the standard 'Go-Around' callout to intervene when the approach deviated from stabilized criteria.