Background
The flight crew was conducting an instrument landing system (ILS) approach in night instrument meteorological conditions. The tower controller informed the crew that the weather had deteriorated below minimums. The captain served as the pilot monitoring, while the first officer was the pilot flying.
Sequence of Events
Both pilots agreed to continue the approach because the aircraft was inside the final approach fix and stabilized. At 200 ft above ground level (agl), both stated they had visual contact with the runway approach lighting system and decided to continue. The first officer then returned to flying instruments. The captain noted the aircraft was drifting right of the runway centerline. The first officer looked outside, observed worsening weather, and felt uncomfortable with the approach. He pressed the takeoff and go-around switch simultaneously with the captain calling for a go-around. The captain later stated the go-around call was prompted by the aircraft not being aligned with the runway.
Both pilots indicated the go-around was initiated at about 50 to 100 ft agl. However, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) revealed that the first officer flew an autopilot-coupled approach down to 50 ft agl, even though the approach procedure prohibited coupled approaches below 240 ft agl. Between 30 and 20 ft agl, the captain told the first officer three times to “flare” and noted the aircraft was drifting right, requiring a left correction. Three seconds elapsed before the first officer attempted to transfer control to the captain, who did not take control and called for a go-around. The first officer added full power and called for flaps to 15°, but the aircraft impacted the ground about 5 seconds later, causing substantial damage to the fuselage.
Cockpit Voice Recorder Analysis
The CVR recording indicated that the approach likely became unstabilized after the autopilot was disconnected and when the first officer lost visual contact with the runway environment. The captain, who maintained visual contact, delayed calling for a go-around until the aircraft was too low to recover.
Probable Cause
The flight crew’s delayed decision to initiate a go-around after the approach had become unstabilized, which resulted in a hard landing.
Additional Findings
Data downloaded from both engines’ digital electronic engine control units showed no anomalies. Neither crew member nor the operator reported any mechanical issues with the aircraft or engines.