Capital A320 lost nosewheel on landing

[pineteam]

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/800x600/0424063e_9989_40c2_ad03_6e84cd99751e_9ec11d46e66f44b6df52c1e 712ccf51315bd63ca.jpeg

[pineteam]

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.

[birdstrike]

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.

[FlexibleResponse]

A bit more on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/9awf2q/this_a320_just_survived_a_wind_shear_an_engine/

[TURIN]

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

[Webby737]

Looks like the NLG sliding tube has sheared off.

[arketip]

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

[Eddie Dean]

From comments on the Reddit site:Wait, they lost the steering wheel and grenaded an engine during landing and then decided "on second thoughts, being safe on the ground is overrated. Let's haul this broke-ass pile back into the sky and see if the Jiffy Lube in Shenzhen still has that $10 tyre deal". I'm surprised that the remaining engine had enough thrust to lift the captain's gigantic balls off the runway.

[Hotel Tango]

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.

[underfire]

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/600x450/w020180828495687696607_4ce3276e527023063a5126dd86790e14eab07 9f1.jpg
Porpoise that hard to rip the nose gear off, damn....you almost have to bend the tube.

[reverserunlocked]

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.

[msbbarratt]

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.

[pattern_is_full]

From Aviation Herald: Accident: Capital Beijing A320 at Macau on Aug 28th 2018, dropped nose wheels on hard touchdown (http://avherald.com/h?article=4bcefedb&opt=0)

On Aug 29th 2018 The Aviation Herald received information from a multitude of sources stating that
- the aircraft touched down on Macau's runway 34 at 7.7 degrees nose up, 123 KIAS and 2.4G, bounced,
- touched down a second time at 15.1 degrees nose up between 133 and 144 KIAS and 3.4G. The aircraft bounced again,
- touched down a third time at 7.7 degrees nose down (nose gear first),
both [nose] wheels and part of the nose gear structure separated, debris was ingested by the left hand engine, debris destroyed the VHF1 antenna (causing temporary loss of communication), the damage to the nose gear also prompted the nose gear to permanently indicate being on the ground preventing gear retraction. About 5 seconds after the third bounce the go around was initiated.

Airline says wind shear precipitated the sequence.

[Escape Path]

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...

Whatever caused the hard touch down and whatever the rights and wrongs of going around, they did a good job in the end

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

[EDML]

Interestingly the IAS increased by 20kt between the 1st and 2nd touchdown. Windsehear or already initated the GA after the first bounce?

[FlightlessParrot]

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.

[fdr]

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.

[JayMatlock]

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.
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.
From Aviation Herald:



Airline says wind shear precipitated the sequence.
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.

[underfire]

The go around initiation seems a bit... delayed?
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.org-vbulletin/711x453/bent_tube3_e91eb04d7b8f437141e58c427fd79b0af163b78d.jpg

[Uplinker]

........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......

On Airbus FBW, TOGA is only activated (by the pilots) by pushing the thrust levers into the full forward gate: ‘click click’ - there is no separate TOGA switch. So you would at least have full thrust.

[Dan Winterland]

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......

Thrust management on a baulked landing is identical to a GA.on an Airbus. Much more intuitive than a Boeing.

[Nightstop]

This looks like a severe hard landing outcome following a bounce on A320’s fitted with pre SEC (Spoiler Elevator Computer) Modification standard. On aircraft with the old SEC, if the aircraft is landed without reducing the Thrust Levers to IDLE in the flare (i.e. Thrust Levers still in the CLB detent), the aircraft will likely bounce without Ground Spoiler extension. The bounce being caused by too high energy level and lack of lift destruction. If, during the first bounce, the Thrust Levers are then moved towards the IDLE position within 3 seconds of the initial touchdown, the Ground Spoilers will extend FULLY. That leads to a sudden loss of lift and results in the hard landing on the second touchdown. G force on the second touchdown is typically in the region of 3.2G
On aircraft with the SEC modification only PARTIAL ground spoiler extension will occur in the above scenario. The second touchdown G force is now typically in the region of 1.7G. In addition, the number and amplitude of bounces is reduced with the new SEC standard.
Which SEC standard was fitted here I wonder?

[Check Airman]

Interesting read on avherald

Accident: Capital Beijing A320 at Macau on Aug 28th 2018, dropped nose wheels on hard touchdown (3.406G) (http://avherald.com/h?article=4bcefedb&opt=152)

[ScepticalOptomist]

That could’ve ended very badly. They were lucky.

[Judd]

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/A320,_Macau_SAR_China,_2018_(1)?utm_source=SKYbrary&utm_campaign=ff07f6d767-%23683+Unanticipated+and+unforecast+low+level&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e405169b04-ff07f6d767-276530305

[DaveReidUK]

I'm not sure why this old thread has been resurrected, but now we're here and in case anyone is wondering (there's no mention in either the Skybrary or Avherald reports), the aircraft never flew again.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/701x467/b_6952_fuselage_damage_de836180617931aba4c30eb1ac9404321dec7 46a.jpg

[atakacs]

I'm not sure why this old thread has been resurrected, but now we're here and in case anyone is wondering (there's no mention in either the Skybrary or Avherald reports), the aircraft never flew again.

What about the pilots?!