Final report: AO-2020-002
Via the OZ:
Heavy rain ignored in QantasLink runway overrun
![[Image: f17f50dd7e26d5ab42fa1341ce647b43?width=650]](https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/f17f50dd7e26d5ab42fa1341ce647b43?width=650)
The pilots of a QantasLink flight that overran a runway by 70m failed to factor in the effect of heavy rain on the landing at Newman Airport in Western Australia.
An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report on the incident on January 9, 2020, found there were no injuries to the 93 passengers and crew on board the Fokker 100 but loose gravel damaged the landing gear.
According to the report, 88mm had fallen on Newman when the QantasLink plane left Perth for the 105-minute flight.
Despite assessing the weather as a threat, the flight crew did not identify the potential effect of the rain on the stopping distance.
“Their focus was primarily on the wind and the visibility,” said the report.
“Despite the forecast for heavy rain obtained before the flight and the aerodrome weather information service providing observations of heavy rain occurring, there was no consideration of the effect of the rainfall on the runway state or the braking performance.”
As a result, when the plane touched down, the brakes did not work as expected and flight crew experienced “aquaplaning” or a sensation of sliding over the runway.
![[Image: 1ca529b9bfeae33bdf0764b8d3b3d682?width=320]](https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/1ca529b9bfeae33bdf0764b8d3b3d682?width=320)
The captain asked the first officer for help in applying the brakes as the Fokker failed to decelerate.
“The aircraft stopped 70m beyond the end of the runway inside the runway end safety area,” the report said.
“An inspection of the aircraft found that the loose gravel had damaged some of the landing gear components.”
The ATSB investigation found neither the operator (Qantas subsidiary) Network Aviation nor the Civil Aviation Safety Authority had published guidance to allow the crew to recognise the conditions as a hazard to the operation.
Network Aviation chief pilot Rick Heaton said the issue was quickly rectified.
“A few weeks after the incident, we introduced new restrictions for landing on runways like they have in Newman in very wet conditions,” Captain Heaton said.
“If these conditions were repeated, the aircraft would divert to another airport.”
Captain Heaton said pilot training had also been updated to include additional strategies to manage similar situations.
Since the incident, CASA had also published guidance, reflecting research from the US that found landing on ungrooved runways in moderate rain had the potential to significantly affect braking performance.
The ATSB also found that the runway had been identified as in need of maintenance to ensure an adequate level of surface friction but that work had not been carried out.
ATSB director of transport safety Stuart Macleod said they encouraged operators and pilots to review the latest guidance and tools available in relation to maintaining safety on runways, and the factors that caused runway overruns.
“In wet weather, additional conservatism is encouraged when calculating the required landing distances,” Mr Macleod said.
REF: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2020-002/
While reviewing the ATSB aviation investigation page I noted the following initiated investigation: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2021-034/
Q1) Pardon my ignorance but since when have the donks on a B200 been numbered (ie No 1. engine and presumably No 2 engine?)??
Quote: "..The pilot restored climb power and continued the take-off. The pilot later reported the number one engine throttle friction was not set correctly. The investigation is continuing.." Q2) Why is the investigation continuing? Surely the finite resources of the ATSB would be better spent investigating accidents/incidents where the cause is not already known - My 2 bob's worth...
MTF...P2
Via the OZ:
Heavy rain ignored in QantasLink runway overrun
The pilots of a QantasLink flight that overran a runway by 70m failed to factor in the effect of heavy rain on the landing at Newman Airport in Western Australia.
An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report on the incident on January 9, 2020, found there were no injuries to the 93 passengers and crew on board the Fokker 100 but loose gravel damaged the landing gear.
According to the report, 88mm had fallen on Newman when the QantasLink plane left Perth for the 105-minute flight.
Despite assessing the weather as a threat, the flight crew did not identify the potential effect of the rain on the stopping distance.
“Their focus was primarily on the wind and the visibility,” said the report.
“Despite the forecast for heavy rain obtained before the flight and the aerodrome weather information service providing observations of heavy rain occurring, there was no consideration of the effect of the rainfall on the runway state or the braking performance.”
As a result, when the plane touched down, the brakes did not work as expected and flight crew experienced “aquaplaning” or a sensation of sliding over the runway.
The captain asked the first officer for help in applying the brakes as the Fokker failed to decelerate.
“The aircraft stopped 70m beyond the end of the runway inside the runway end safety area,” the report said.
“An inspection of the aircraft found that the loose gravel had damaged some of the landing gear components.”
The ATSB investigation found neither the operator (Qantas subsidiary) Network Aviation nor the Civil Aviation Safety Authority had published guidance to allow the crew to recognise the conditions as a hazard to the operation.
Network Aviation chief pilot Rick Heaton said the issue was quickly rectified.
“A few weeks after the incident, we introduced new restrictions for landing on runways like they have in Newman in very wet conditions,” Captain Heaton said.
“If these conditions were repeated, the aircraft would divert to another airport.”
Captain Heaton said pilot training had also been updated to include additional strategies to manage similar situations.
Since the incident, CASA had also published guidance, reflecting research from the US that found landing on ungrooved runways in moderate rain had the potential to significantly affect braking performance.
The ATSB also found that the runway had been identified as in need of maintenance to ensure an adequate level of surface friction but that work had not been carried out.
ATSB director of transport safety Stuart Macleod said they encouraged operators and pilots to review the latest guidance and tools available in relation to maintaining safety on runways, and the factors that caused runway overruns.
“In wet weather, additional conservatism is encouraged when calculating the required landing distances,” Mr Macleod said.
REF: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2020-002/
While reviewing the ATSB aviation investigation page I noted the following initiated investigation: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2021-034/
Quote:The ATSB has commenced a transport safety investigation into an uncommanded engine power reduction involving the Beechcraft King Air 200C, VH-VAH, at Essendon Airport, Vic., 19 August 2021.
At about 50 ft on take-off, a partial power loss from the number one engine resulted in a momentary loss of directional control and a failure to achieve climb performance. The pilot restored climb power and continued the take-off. The pilot later reported the number one engine throttle friction was not set correctly. The investigation is continuing.
The evidence collection phase of the investigation will include interviewing the crew, a review and examination of operational manuals, maintenance records and the gathering of any other relevant evidence.
A report will be published at the conclusion of the investigation. Should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties, so that appropriate safety action can be taken.
Q1) Pardon my ignorance but since when have the donks on a B200 been numbered (ie No 1. engine and presumably No 2 engine?)??
Quote: "..The pilot restored climb power and continued the take-off. The pilot later reported the number one engine throttle friction was not set correctly. The investigation is continuing.." Q2) Why is the investigation continuing? Surely the finite resources of the ATSB would be better spent investigating accidents/incidents where the cause is not already known - My 2 bob's worth...
MTF...P2