Casualties unknown

2010-07-25: ERJ 170-100 STD Embraer 170 (G-LCYF) — Edinburgh Airport, Scotland, GB

Edinburgh Airport, Scotland, GB

On July 25, 2010, an ERJ 170-100 STD Embraer 170 (registration G-LCYF) was involved in an aviation accident near Edinburgh Airport, Scotland, GB. This summary draws on records from the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB).

Sourcesthe UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB)Primary reportUpdated 1785053200Data APIEditorial standards
Aircraft registered G-LCYF
Aircraft registered G-LCYF. Photo: Hansueli Krapf This file was uploaded with Commonist . / CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

An Embraer 170 (G-LCYF) struck a blast fence during pushback from Stand 34 at Edinburgh Airport on 25 July 2010. No injuries were reported; damage was to the APU intake. Investigations identified factors including the stand's unique 'dog-leg' pushback.

Aircraft and Flight Details

The aircraft involved was an ERJ 170-100 STD Embraer 170, registered G-LCYF, manufactured in 2009. It was powered by two General Electric CF34-8E5A1 turbofan engines. The flight was a commercial air transport passenger service. On board were 4 crew and 68 passengers. The commander, aged 38, held an Airline Transport Pilot's Licence and had 6,500 total flying hours, including 450 hours on type.

Accident Sequence

On 25 July 2010 at 1710 UTC, during pushback from Stand 34 at Edinburgh Airport, Scotland, the underside of the aircraft's tail struck a blast fence. The ground crew halted the pushback, pulled the aircraft slightly forward, and informed the flight crew. The flight crew aborted engine starts and shut down the auxiliary power unit (APU). Passengers disembarked normally using mobile steps.

Damage and Response

The damage was limited to the APU intake on the underside of the tail. An engineer who attended noted that most of the damage occurred when the aircraft was pulled forward after the initial impact, rather than during the collision itself. The aircraft operator subsequently found that ground handling companies should be reminded not to move an aircraft that has sustained damage until it has been inspected by an engineer.

Investigation Findings

Investigations were conducted by the aircraft operator and the ground handling company that performed the pushback. Both organisations identified several factors relevant to the accident, notably that Stand 34 is the only stand at the airport requiring a 'dog-leg' pushback. The investigations highlighted opportunities for improvement in several areas of ground handling operations.

Recommendations

The companies conducting the investigations made several recommendations, focusing on risk assessment of push-back operations, design of push-back procedures, promulgation of clear instructions to staff, training of ground handling staff, the design and marking of Stand 34, and 'near-miss' reporting within the ground handling company. The report noted that ground handling of aircraft is not regulated to the same degree as aircraft operations.