ASN Wikibase Occurrence # 240551
This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information.
If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can submit corrected information.
| Date: | Thursday 21 September 2017 |
| Time: | 18:40 UTC |
| Type: |  Beechcraft Beechjet 400A |
| Owner/operator: | Líder Táxi-Aéreo |
| Registration: | PT-WHE |
| MSN: | RK-81 |
| Year of manufacture: | 1993 |
| Fatalities: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 2 |
| Aircraft damage: | Minor |
| Category: | Serious incident |
| Location: | Mucuri Airport, BA (MVS/SNMU) -
 Brazil
|
| Phase: | Landing |
| Nature: | Ferry/positioning |
| Departure airport: | Vitória-Goiabeiras Airport, ES (VIX/SBVT) |
| Mucuri Airport, BA (MVS/SNMU) | |
| Investigating agency: | CENIPA |
| Confidence Rating: |  Accident investigation report completed and information captured |
The aircraft took off from Aguiar Salles Eurico Aerodrome (SBVT), Vitoria, ES, to Mucuri Aerodrome (SNMU), BA, at 18:10 (UTC), in order to make a transfer flight, with two pilots on board.
During the landing run the pilots believed that there were problems with the normal brake system and with the engine reversers. They decided to activate the emergency brake and the wheels of the main landing gear were locked.
The plane drifted to the left and stopped outside the lateral and longitudinal limits of the runway, in an area of low vegetation.
The aircraft had slight damage. The crew left unharmed.
Contributing factors:
- Attitude - undetermined.
It is likely that the failure to comply with the parameters set forth in the operator's SOP and Operations Manual, in relation to the criteria that defined a stabilized approach and the speed at which the runway threshold in use crossed, contributed to an unstable approach and a long landing.
- Cockpit coordination - undetermined.
The decision to proceed with the landing may have been a consequence of an inefficient use of human resources available for the aircraft operation, since the landing was being conducted with different parameters from those recommended in the company's SOP and Operations Manual and, according to reports, the option to go around was not suggested by any of the crew members at any time of the landing.
- Airport infrastructure - undetermined.
It is possible that the absence of the 1,000ft marks has hindered the pilots' assessment of the position in which the touchdown occurred and influenced their decision to proceed with landing.
- Pilot judgement - contributed.
By deciding to make the final approach using a higher than expected threshold crossing speed, the crew failed to adequately assess the reflexes of this aspect on the distance traveled by the aircraft after touching the runway.
Moreover, the decision to proceed with landing, to the detriment of the more conservative option that would be to execute the rejected approach procedure, characterized an inadequate evaluation of the parameters involved in that operation.
- Decision making process - contributed.
The adoption of a higher speed than foreseen in the short final, despite the rules established in SOP and Operations Manual, reflected an unstructured decision, based on scenario analysis and the choice of inappropriate actions to safely carry out the landing.
Accident investigation:
 |
|
Sources:
CENIPA
Revision history:
| Date/time | Contributor | Updates |
|---|---|---|
| 27-Aug-2020 17:44 | harro | Added |
| 27-Aug-2020 17:49 | harro | Updated [Aircraft type, Cn, Operator, Location, Narrative, Accident report, ] |
Corrections or additions? ... Edit this accident description
The Aviation Safety Network is an exclusive service provided by:
Quick Links:
| ASN Home | Send Correction / Feedback |
| FSF Home | Disclaimer | Copyright |
| Contact Us | Privacy Policy |
| Press / Media |
CONNECT WITH US:
©2024 Flight Safety Foundation