FlarePath
Cases › DCA17LA145 · Part 121 airline · Class 3

AIRBUS A321Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Atlanta, GA, USA · 2017-06-23·N315DN

0
fatal
0
serious
No injury
highest injury
Substantial
damage

What happened

NTSB summary, verbatim

The first officer was on her third day of initial operating experience training and was the pilot flying for the flight; the captain, a check airman, was the pilot monitoring. The first officer reported that this was her fourth landing in an A320-series airplane and her first landing in an A321 model. According to the captain and first officer, the flight was cleared for the visual approach, the approach was stable, and wind was out of the southwest at 12 kts with gusts up to 20 kts. The first officer recalled that the captain instructed her to "pull back pull back" before touchdown. Both pilots reported that the landing was “firm.” The first officer stated that after landing, the captain provided feedback that she flared a little low (near 20 ft above ground level [agl] instead of 30 ft agl) and did not provide enough pitch back on the side stick. Both crewmembers reported that the first officer was late to flare on previous landings. A company pilot who was seated in the cockpit jumpseat reported the captain was providing instruction to the first officer during the flight about the nuances of the A321. He stated that the descent and arrival were uneventful up until the flare and that the first officer “never really performed any type of flare maneuver even as the captain repeatedly called for the F/O to perform one." Subsequent preflight inspection of the airplane by the next flight crew revealed an area of abrasion damage to the aft fuselage about 13 ft long by 2 ft wide affecting two skin panels. The fuselage skin was abraded through in several areas with damage to the underlying stringers and frames. Several frames, stringers, and shear clips were also bent and/or fractured.

Photographs

1the aircraft, and what the investigators found
The aircraft before the accident
Delta Air Lines A321-211, N315DN, as DL 1203 BOS-ATL (32715283415)
Charles from Port Chester, New York · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Probable cause

the Board's determination
The first officer's improper landing flare, which resulted in a hard, bounced landing, and the flight crew’s improper bounced landing recovery procedures.

Occurrence sequence

2 stepsNTSB coding · CICTT taxonomy
  1. 1 · Landing-flare/touchdown
    Abnormal runway contact
  2. 2 · Landing-flare/touchdown
    Tailstrike
    defining event

Findings

2 causal · 0 contributing
  • CAUSE
    Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control — Copilot
  • CAUSE
    Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Incorrect action sequence — Flight crew

Sequence of events

8 timed eventsfrom the FDR factual report · claude-sonnet-5
  1. 13:35:55Approachp.3
    Aircraft descended below 2000 feet AGL; airspeed about 160 knots, vertical speed 500-1000 fpm descent, landing gear selected down, autopilot not engaged, autothrottle engaged
  2. 13:37:58Approach/Flarep.3
    Pitch began increasing from 2 degrees
  3. 13:38:03Flarep.3
    Flare law mode activated
  4. 13:38:06Flarep.3
    Autothrottle disengaged
  5. 13:38:07Touchdownp.3
    Both main gear weight on wheels (WOW) status switched from air to ground; aircraft experienced maximum vertical acceleration of 1.89 g
  6. 13:38:08Touchdown/Bouncep.3
    Both main gear WOW status switched briefly back to air
  7. 13:38:09Second touchdown/Tail strikep.3
    Both main gear WOW status switched back to ground; aircraft experienced maximum primary pitch angle of 9.7 degrees nose up, maximum standby pitch angle of 9.8 degrees nose up, and a spike in vertical acceleration of 1.65 g
  8. 13:38:12Landing rollp.3
    Nose gear WOW status transitioned to ground and the aircraft decelerated using brakes, spoilers, and thrust reversers

NTSB analysis

from the final report

The first officer was on her third day of initial operating experience training and was the pilot flying for the flight; the captain, a check airman, was the pilot monitoring. The first officer reported that this was her fourth landing in an A320-series airplane and her first landing in an A321 model. According to the captain and first officer, the flight was cleared for the visual approach, the approach was stable, and wind was out of the southwest at 12 kts with gusts up to 20 kts. The first officer recalled that the captain instructed her to "pull back pull back" before touchdown. Both pilots reported that the landing was “firm.” The first officer stated that after landing, the captain provided feedback that she flared a little low (near 20 ft above ground level [agl] instead of 30 ft agl) and did not provide enough pitch back on the side stick. Both crewmembers reported that the first officer was late to flare on previous landings. A company pilot who was seated in the cockpit jumpseat reported the captain was providing instruction to the first officer during the flight about the nuances of the A321. He stated that the descent and arrival were uneventful up until the flare and that the first officer “never really performed any type of flare maneuver even as the captain repeatedly called for the F/O to perform one." Subsequent preflight inspection of the airplane by the next flight crew revealed an area of abrasion damage to the aft fuselage about 13 ft long by 2 ft wide affecting two skin panels. The fuselage skin was abraded through in several areas with damage to the underlying stringers and frames. Several frames, stringers, and shear clips were also bent and/or fractured.