Flight Details
The airplane, carrying two flight crewmembers and a pilot-rated passenger, conducted a cross-country flight. The departure and en route phases were uneventful. As the flight neared its destination—a high-altitude, terrain-limited airport—air traffic control (ATC) provided vectors for the localizer/distance measuring equipment (LOC/DME)-E approach to runway 15.
Approach and Landing
At about 1210, the local controller reported wind from 290° at 19 knots, gusting to 25 knots. The crew executed a missed approach and requested vectors for a second attempt. At about 1221, the controller reported wind from 330° at 16 knots, with a 1-minute average of 320° at 14 knots gusting to 25 knots. The initial part of the second approach was as expected for descent angle, flap setting, and spoilers. During the final minute, the engines were advanced and retarded five times, and airspeed varied between 135 and 150 knots. The final portion was not consistent with a stabilized approach; the airplane remained nose-down during descent and initial runway contact. Parameters indicated pitch oscillation above the runway for several seconds before a hard contact, a gain in altitude, and a final impact at about 6 g. The wind conditions near or exceeded the airplane's maximum tailwind and crosswind components for landing as published in the flight manual.
Performance Calculations
Given the aircraft's position when the approach became unstabilized and terrain limitations, performance calculations assessed go-around capability. Assuming crew control, engines advanced to appropriate climb setting, anti-ice off, and tailwinds less than 25 knots sustained, the airplane could have completed a go-around and cleared local obstacles.
Crew Experience
Both flight crewmembers recently completed simulator training for a type rating in the CL600 airplane. The captain reported 12–14 total hours in type, including simulator time. The copilot had similar hours. Neither met the 25-hour minimum for pilot-in-command under Part 135; however, the flight was conducted under Part 91, making that requirement inapplicable. The captain stated that the passenger—an experienced CL-600-rated pilot—was asked to provide guidance during the approach. However, the passenger was seated in the jumpseat and could not reach the controls, thus unable to act as pilot-in-command.