What happened
On the evening of May 27, 2018, between 21:30 and 22:00, several aircraft experienced losses of separation while approaching Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas Airport. The incident occurred within the Madrid CTR (control zone) during a period of highly complex air traffic management.
Prior to the separation losses, a sequence of seven consecutive go-arounds took place between 20:47 and 20:57. These missed approaches were necessitated by sudden convective activity, which produced significant wind shear and a sudden shift in wind speed and direction. As a result of these meteorological changes, the airport transitioned from a North Configuration to a South Configuration at 20:54. The combination of the recent go-arounds, the adverse weather, and the sudden change in runway operations created a highly unstable environment for approaching traffic.
The investigation
The CIAIAC investigation examined the operational sequence of the seven go-arounds and the subsequent separation losses involving eight different aircraft, including an Airbus A-320 (CS-TNQ), a Bombardier CL600 2E25 (EC-LJS), a Boeing 737-800 (EI-FZR), a Bombardier CL600 2E25 (EC-LJR), an Airbus A-320 (EC-LYM), a Boeing 737-800 (EI-FTY), a Boeing 737-800 (EC-LXV), and an Airbus A330-200 (EC-LVL).
The investigation focused on the impact of the airport configuration change on the Madrid TMA, the suitability of the weather information provided to air traffic controllers, and the effectiveness of the automated terminal information system (ATIS) during the storm. No injuries were reported among the crews or passengers of the involved aircraft, and no aircraft sustained damage.
Findings
- The primary cause of the separation losses was the complex operational situation within the Madrid TMA airspace.
- A sudden and significant change in wind speed and direction caused the necessity for a runway configuration change.
- There was an unavailability of weather information tools capable of covering the entire Madrid TMA airspace.
- The time required to process and implement the decision to change the airport configuration contributed to the operational strain.