No fatalities

2009-12-07: Embraer ERJ-135 (ZS-SJW) — South African Airlink — George, South Africa

George, South AfricaLanding (descent or approach)

On December 7, 2009, an Embraer ERJ-135 (registration ZS-SJW) operated by South African Airlink was involved in an aviation accident near George, South Africa during landing or approach. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: The crew were unable to decelerate the aircraft to a safe stop due to ineffective braking of the aircraft on a wet runway surface, resulting in an overrun. This summary draws on records from the Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A); 5 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

Sourcesthe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A)Primary reportUpdated 1781196394Data APIEditorial standards

Flight SA8625, a domestic service from Cape Town to George, overran the runway on landing, colliding with approach lights and the perimeter fence. Ten occupants were hospitalized for observation and released with no serious injuries.

Incident

On a scheduled domestic flight from Cape Town International Airport to George Airport (FAGG), Flight SA8625 carried three crew members and 32 passengers. The weather at George Airport was overcast with light rain. The aircraft was cleared for an instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 11. It touched down between the third and fourth landing markers. According to the air traffic controller, the landing appeared normal, but the aircraft did not turn left to vacate the runway as expected. Instead, it veered to the right, overran the runway, and continued past the ILS localizer. The controller activated the crash alarm. The cockpit crew did not broadcast any messages indicating a problem.

The aircraft collided with eleven approach lights, then burst through the aerodrome perimeter fence, coming to rest in a nose-down attitude on the R404 public road.

Evacuation

Several motorists stopped and assisted the passengers, who evacuated the aircraft through the right front service door and the left mid-fuselage emergency exit. Aerodrome fire and rescue personnel arrived within minutes and helped evacuate the cockpit crew, who were trapped in the cockpit. Ten occupants were admitted to a local hospital for a check-up and released after a few hours. No serious injuries were reported.

Investigation

The investigation determined that the crew were unable to decelerate the aircraft to a safe stop due to ineffective braking on a wet runway surface, resulting in the overrun. Contributory factors included: the aircraft crossing the runway threshold at 50 ft AGL at 143 KIAS, 15 kt above the calculated VREF speed; a 1.5-second transition back into air mode after touchdown followed by a 4-second delay in applying brakes after the aircraft remained in permanent ground mode; and two of the four main tires displaying limited to no tread, which degraded water displacement from the tire footprint and significantly affected braking effectiveness on the wet surface. Several non-compliance procedures were identified.

Probable cause

The crew were unable to decelerate the aircraft to a safe stop due to ineffective braking of the aircraft on a wet runway surface, resulting in an overrun. Contributory factors: - The aircraft crossed the runway threshold at 50 ft AGL at 143 KIAS, which was 15 kt above the calculated VREF speed. - Although the aircraft initially touched down within the touchdown zone the transition back into air mode of 1.5 seconds followed by a 4 second delay in applying the brakes after the aircraft remained in permanent ground mode should be considered as a significant contributory factor to this accident as it was imperative to decelerate the aircraft as soon as possible. - Two of the four main tyres displayed limited to no tyre tread. This was considered to have degraded the displacement of water from the tyre footprint, which had a significant effect on the braking effectiveness of the aircraft during the landing rollout on the wet runway surface. Several non-compliance procedures were not followed.