Capital A320 lost nosewheel on landing
 

JD5759, flying from Beijing (PEK) to Macau (MFM). From what I heard they lost the nosewheel on touchdown in Macau and the debris damaged one engine. They went around and landed safely in Shenzen ( SZX) airport.

Seems a very strange decision.
Having landed and lowered the nosewheel you realise you have some form of problem - but can't know exactly what - and elect to get airborne, discover you have engine damage and then fly to another airfield.
Hopefully there is more to it than that or I think you'd be justified in questioning their decision making.

A bit more on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...ear_an_engine/

Bit more than losing a wheel. half the damn leg has dissapeared.

Looks like the NLG sliding tube has sheared off.

Did it bounce?
That would be a good reason to go-around

From comments on the Reddit site:

But you didn't quote this objective reply:

Maybe because the repair depot is in Shenzhen? Also I'm pretty sure that bouncing on the runway in strong gusts and rain without a nose gear and crash-land at the cost of steering off the runway and plunging into the South China Sea is not a great idea either.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...14eab079f1.jpg
Porpoise that hard to rip the nose gear off, damn....you almost have to bend the tube.

Whatever caused the hard touch down and whatever the rights and wrongs of going around, they did a good job in the end. They had an engine fail on the go around, lost comms (they communicated through ACARS) and the ECAM actions alone would have been interesting to say the least. Then a single engine no nose gear landing? Okaaaay.

I doubt they knew they’d lost the nose gear at the point they binned the approach. They just probably had a stuffed up landing because of the windshear and banged it in, went around and then all hell let loose.

Could buff out alright.

Joking apart, it shows just how robust airliners are these days. Despite pretty severe damage, flying was still possible as was a landing that everyone walked away from. Congrats certainly owed in many directions.

From Aviation Herald: Accident: Capital Beijing A320 at Macau on Aug 28th 2018, dropped nose wheels on hard touchdown

Airline says wind shear precipitated the sequence.

15.1 ANU? That's a tailstrike in the A320. I guess some photos should eventually emerge if such damage existed.

The go around initiation seems a bit... delayed? If in gusty conditions I plant it at 2.4g, then plant it again at 3.4g, I don't think I'd wait for the third smackdown to call the quits. Yet it looks like it took them the extra fall from the sky + 5 additional seconds to only take the decision. Should be interesting to hear the CVR...

Everything else after that (deviating with a half broken airplane plus comm failure and what have you) is just covering up the holes made by their earlier decisions (or lack of them). Kudos for covering properly (i.e. not killing/seriously injuring someone) in the end, it seems, but...

...can't say I fully agree with that statement if such a mess was created by themselves in the first place.

Eddie Dean

I have no capacity to comment on this event except to note that Shenzhen is only 60 k from Macau, the Macau airport seems to consist of a single runway and a half-length taxiway entirely surrounded by water, and by this stage that runway might be expected to have the odd foreign object on it.

tailstrike on an A320-200 occurs at 11.7 degrees oleos compressed, and 13.5 extended. The data recording rate for pitch is not particularly fast, nor is the WOG discretes, so a rapidly pitching aircraft can record very high values without actually touching its butt, but they were close, really close. Pitch rate would have been impressive, but is possible, the elevators are in a direct law at that time. Pretty interesting ride for the pax. The flight crew got to have an unusual view of the runway on the third impact, imagine a face plant. That the plane stayed in one piece is remarkable, they were well outside of any design criteria, the loads would be extraordinary, and I would think that there will be a long long long inspection on the aircraft after this one.

The 3rd impact is consistent with a PIO in the bounced landing recovery, which is why the procedure that is written by Airbus and Boeing and everyone else is pretty clear. These guys were lucky. The damage to the #1 engine is impressive in its own right.

Lottery tickets for all, and the airline.

Yes there is more to that.
First there was a bounce. Then the pilot pushed and the nlg broke on ground.
Problem is, when your nlg touches first, this creates an upward rotating motion. They did not really decided to takeoff, the airplane bounced again.
Also the wind could have played a part with increased airspeed

So the decision to go around was maybe provoked by the second bounce.
The pitch never was 7° down on touchdown.. Maybe it was when the wheel broke though, but not just before

"touched down a second time at 15.1 degrees nose up between 133 and 144 KIAS and 3.4G. The aircraft bounced again,"
That actually was after the -1° touchdown on the nosewheel, and this was a tail strike.

GA is a bit tougher when the ac senses ground mode. Probably hit TOGA, and it took a few seconds to figure out they had to advance thrust manually, as well as everything else manually. Not exactly sure what works automatically on this variant when in ground mode, but it aint a hell of a lot.

a tail strike, nose strike that ripped off the landing gear and send it into the motor, no comms, and an alternate landing location.....(bent tube?)

damn.
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0af163b78d.jpg