What aircraft was involved and where did it happen?

The accident on 2019-01-25 involved a aircraft, registration PRCSW, at SãO JOãO DEL REI, MG, BR.

What was the probable cause of the accident?

The runway excursion was caused by the pilot's decision to engage the emergency parking brake, which disabled the anti-skid system and led to wheel lock-up on a wet runway, compounded by inadequate decision-making regarding landing distance requirements and runway conditions.

Embraer Phenom 300 Runway Excursion at São João del Rei

An Embraer EMB-500 experienced a runway excursion during a landing on a wet runway, resulting in minor aircraft damage but no injuries.

What happened

On January 25, 2019, an Embraer EMB-500, registration PR-CSW, was performing a private passenger flight from Belo Horizonte to São João del Rei, MG. The flight involved one pilot and six passengers. During the approach to runway 08, the pilot executed a go-around due to heavy rain at the threshold. The pilot then opted to land on runway 26.

The landing occurred on a wet runway with a 10-knot tailwind component. After touchdown, the pilot applied maximum braking through the primary brakes. Approximately 12 seconds after touchdown, believing the primary brakes were ineffective, the pilot engaged the Emergency/Parking Brake (EPB). This action caused the wheels to lock, as the EPB does not utilize the anti-skid system. The aircraft subsequently skidded, rotated 180 degrees, and exited the runway at the opposite end. The aircraft sustained light damage, including tire bursts and damage to the main gear and tail cone, but all seven occupants were uninjured.

The investigation

CENIPA investigators analyzed data from the Combined Voice and Data Recorder (CVDR) and the Central Maintenance Computer (CMC). The investigation confirmed that the pilot was properly licensed and the aircraft was airworthy and within weight limits.

Analysis of the CVDR revealed that a passenger—a pilot from the same company who was not rated for this aircraft type—was acting as an unofficial second-in-command, assisting with communications and flight tasks. The investigation found that while the passenger had previously advised against landing on runway 08 due to wind, there was no discussion regarding the increased landing distance required for the wet runway 26.

Technical analysis of the runway showed signs of hydroplaning, with continuous white marks left by the tires. Testing of the braking system and the Brake Control Unit (BCU) revealed no mechanical or electronic malfunctions. The investigation concluded that the application of the EPB removed the anti-skid protection, leading to wheel lock-up.

Findings

The pilot's decision to use the Emergency/Parking Brake contributed to the loss of anti-skid protection and subsequent wheel lock-up.
The pilot's decision-making regarding the landing on runway 26, considering the wet surface and tailwind, was a contributing factor.
The presence of an unqualified pilot in the right seat acting as an unofficial crew member may have contributed to overconfidence.
The lack of consideration regarding the required landing distance for the specific runway conditions contributed to the excursion.

Safety action

CENIPA recommended that the airport operator at SNJR verify the surface friction and drainage characteristics of the runway. Additionally, it recommended that flight training centers for the EMB-500 model disseminate the findings of this investigation to promote best practices for landing procedures and adherence to manufacturer documentation.