G550 damaged on landing LFPB

[Flyguy2002]

Came across this on ASN:

The flight crew of a Gulfstream G550 jet was flying a LOC approach for runway 25 at Paris-Le Bourget Airport when the crew mistook the old closed runway as runway 25. Realizing their wrong alignment, they tried to correct at low altitude. The aircraft touched the ground with the left wing hitting several runway edge lights on runway 25. A go-around was initiated. The aircraft landed 15 minutes later on runway 25, with considerable damage.


http://https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=199669

Sounds pretty hairy. Can someone on Loc25 really mistake the old mini runway for the current 10kft one? Sounds unlikely to me...

Any one have any further details?

FG02

[Old Boeing Driver]

I have made approaches to LFPB many times.

Diverting from the LOC 25 to the old closed runway is difficult to understand.

That approach is an offset, so maybe they took a turn too early.

Maybe they were told to circle to 27 and got confused there?

I'm sure we'll have more info soon.

RGDS

[eckhard]

I too have flown that approach many times. There is a time during the approach that you cross the centreline of the old runway and it could be tempting to turn and line up on that instead of the intended runway which, at that point, is still considerably offset. Maybe poor visibility played a part? Mind you, the last time I checked, there are large 'X' marks painted on the disused runway, together with 'AEROPORT DE PARIS LE BOURGET' along its length.
If only they had gone around straight away, instead of trying to salvage a bad approach. How many pilots have said that to themselves in the past (I have), and how many more will say that in the future?

[Old Boeing Driver]

Eckhard. I agree. The controllers are always wanting you to stay away from CDG, and in low visibility, they may have just thought that was the correct offset runway.

However, the G-550 has some fantastic navigation equipment.

As far as I know, the "X's" and the words are still on the old runway.

You are correct in that a go around would have been a better plan.

RGDS

[Globally Challenged]

The old runway has a huge white X on a bright blue background - pretty tricky to miss ...

[atakacs]

Was it daytime operation?

[Delta12]

If the missed approach is as ****** up as the missed for ILS RWY27 one might be tempted not to fly the missed but get it down on the RWY for almost any price.

The one coming up with that **** should be taken to court, especially since the RNAV RWY27 seems to be ok with a reasonable missed approach procedure...

[Kelly Hopper]

Having flown a missed approach to RWY 27 the reality is you get passed to CDG immediately and they give you vectors. But I agree, the published missed is a plate of spaghetti!

[petersaunders]

Was 1713 local time, maybe sun in their eyes.

[petersaunders]

Sunset would have been after 2000, so sun would have been high.

[Flyguy2002]

LFPB 101500Z AUTO 22012KT 9999 FEW032 OVC064 19/12 Q1004 TEMPO 21015G25KT SCT030TCU

I wouldn't necessarily call that low viz, a bit windy if anything. Certainly within limits tho.

All of the approaches to 25 (LOCa25, RNAV25, VORa25, & VPTd25) are offset 20-30 deg due to CDG, requiring swing over on short final.

Gusty winds would make the transition a bit more difficult, but since the report says the left wing hit runway edge lights on 25, it sounds more like they overshot the swing over and tried to save it or had too much bank still in on flare.

It will be telling if the damaged runway lights were on the left or right side of 25. Right side would indicate a nearly disasterous situation...left side less so.

But as mentioned above, definitely not worth bending the jet trying to salvage a bad approach.

[Globally Challenged]

RNAV 27 has been u/s for some time and some time to come. Rather inexplicably I think.

[Propellerpilot]

I guess the crew must have been totally unfamiliar with LFPB - Rwy25 is not only the longest with a considerable amount of displaced threshold, northernmost but concrete white while all other Rwys are tar.

[mutt]

I absolutely hate the missed approach procedures in LBG, 1000 feet level off in an aircraft that will get there in seconds.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=199669

The OP link doesn't appear to work.

[Flyguy2002]

Looks like the operator updated the narrative of what occurred:

The flight crew of a Gulfstream G550 jet was flying a LOC approach for runway 25 at Paris-Le Bourget Airport when the crew mistook runway 27 as runway 25. Realizing their wrong alignment, they corrected at low altitude. Hit by a crosswind gust the aircraft touched with the left wing a runway edge light on runway 25. A go-around was initiated. The aircraft landed 15 minutes later on runway 25.


I guess after landing routinely on 27, one could forget to swing over if distracted/tired etc.

[Propellerpilot]

Looks like the operator updated the narrative of what occurred:



I guess after landing routinely on 27, one could forget to swing over if distracted/tired etc.

That version can not possibly be reasonably true. If you look at the chart of the approach LOC 25 it still takes you to the VOR co-located at the beginning of the runway, there is just an offset of 26° - as the threshold is diplaced, there is plenty of time to align - 9 seconds using a standard rate turn. As the height above the VOR i.e. threshold, DH is 614' there is no need to rush if you initiate the turn at minimums.

So they did not follow the procedure LOC 25 as stated - how can you otherwise mistake 27 for 25 if you have briefed an offset procedure and you followed the localizer ?? The localizer 25 does not align you with 27.

[Old Boeing Driver]

Any news published about this incident since it happened?

RGDS

OBD

[FLEXJET]

I think that you'll have to be patient, and look here occasionaly:


https://www.bea.aero/index.php?id=40&news=17580&cHash=68931518f5275d014ccfd651097041db

[CL300]

So they did not follow the procedure LOC 25 as stated - how can you otherwise mistake 27 for 25 if you have briefed an offset procedure and you followed the localizer ?? The localizer 25 does not align you with 27.

Nope but the first runway you see is 21, then you have 27 slightly on the right then the 25... It is funny how the brain can work sometimes.. How come runway 25 cannot be in between ? :{:sad::eek:

Dump a bit of XWind in this and you have your nose pointing right where you do not want to go...

my 2cents tho

[Propellerpilot]

Nope but the first runway you see is 21, then you have 27 slightly on the right then the 25... It is funny how the brain can work sometimes.. How come runway 25 cannot be in between ? :{:sad::eek:

Dump a bit of XWind in this and you have your nose pointing right where you do not want to go...

my 2cents tho

I do not follow your argument of Rwy 21, it does not make sense - as it is located nowhere close on this direction of the approach. Maybe you were referring to the closed runway (26?) ?