[Username Protected]

A Phenom 100 registered to Luxwing, went off the side of runway 27 at Paris-Le Bourget Airport on February 8th. The flight arrived from Venice, Italy. Little is known at this time but reporting from the accident photos shows the aircraft appeared to have swerved to one side of the runway, then corrected to centerline, before swerving off the side of the runway. There were minor injuries and a small fire was promptly extinguished. Below are some links with further information.


https://aviation-safety.net/photo/11...nom-100-9H-FAM
https://mentourpilot.com/accident-lu...%20in%20Italy.

[Username Protected]

Additional news reports say it was a belly landing (or a gear collapse):

"...For some as yet unknown reason, the aircraft touched down on the runway while its gear was still retracted. In a shower of sparks and flames, it skidded for several hundred meters before coming to a stop at the threshold of the runway..."

https://www.aviation24.be/airports/p...urget-airport/

https://www.scramble.nl/civil-news/p...ris-le-bourget



Interesting that the nose gear doors are open....

[Username Protected]

The final report is out. Sounds like the crew deactivated de-icing before landing but still had (or picked up more) ice.

I need to check my math more closely, but it seems like they should have been able to land with de-ice on:
- Weight: 4080 kg / 8980 lbs
- Temp: 0 ºC
- Wind: almost 0 headwind
- Altitude: 67 m / 220 ft
- Dry runway

Most conservatively from the QRH, that looks like about 4,265 feet with de-ice on. But the final report says 2301 m / 7549 ft. I must be missing something!

[Username Protected]

That's a really good report, honestly I like the format better than NTSB reports.
There were a couple things that were odd or not fully explained that I'm curious about:

• They never mention whether the crew did the SWPS Speed Reset, although they do imply that it was done since they say the speed tape and stall warning was set to non-icing speeds by the time of landing. If you want to land the non-icing speeds you had obviously better reset the SWPS Speeds, but I found it interesting that they didn't call out that specific action being taken (and the fact that you are absolutely not supposed to do that unless the airplane is free of ice).
• The timeline to touchdown is odd - "Five seconds after flying through a radio-altimeter height of 50 ft, the aeroplane’s speed decreasedfrom 94 to 90 kt and the angle of attack increased from 10 to 28°. The aeroplane abruptly sunk, thenormal acceleration reached -0,4 G, the vertical speed increased from -700 to -960 ft/min and theroll angle alternated between 2° to the left and 10° to the right."
  
  • However, 5 seconds after flying through 50ft when descending at 700ft/min (a normal decent rate) would put you... on the ground. Yet they obviously touched-down some time after that, and after stalling, and well short of the 1000ft markers. How does that happen if they are on glide?
  • Later in the narrative, they mention the pilot thought they were high on the glide slope after passing the minimums (but doesn't say how far past) and initiated a go-around. Does this mean they were already trying to go-around prior to the 50ft altitude? Did the plane stall during the attempted go around (perhaps when he pulled up prior to the engines spooling to full power?)
  • That certainly puts a different spin on things, because it implies that the plane might not have stalled if he had flown to the ground at the ~97kt target vref rather than attempting a go-around past the minimums. Of course all the other bad decision making around icing and ref speeds still stands, but the report doesn't really seem to call out if the attempted go-around came before or after the stall.

My last comment is... either the pilot really mis-understood what Embraer means when the plane has to be "free of ice" to disable ice protection / reset SWPS, or he wasn't being honest about seeing the wings free of icing. On a my previous plane (with boots) the wing was NEVER clear of ice after icing & boot activation, even long after you left active icing... in fact, the only time it would fully clear is if you happened to break out into the sunshine and melt it off. Certainly NOT in a matter of seconds (as they imply). Has anyone seen boots shed ALL ice that fast?

The hot wing on the 300 is way different... it sheds ice on protected areas completely and very fast, but even then, if I had ANY ice picked up on final approach I would leave everything on to the ground -- while ice on unprotected areas doesn't have the same impact, it doesn't have zero impact either.

In the end, it's gotta-get-there-itis combined with either a willful (or otherwise) ignorance of what it means for the plane to be free of ice.

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected)-

The 100 doesn't have the ICE SPEED RESET position on the WINGSTAB switch as the 300 does- it's either ON or OFF. As a result, the AFM says the WINGSTAB should be left ON until the pilot is sure all residual ice is clear.

In my opinion this is a poor design, and the nuance seems to be overlooked by pilots frequently. It's one thing to turn the WINGSTAB OFF, it's another to affirmatively turn the SWPS schedule back to non-ice.

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected)-

The 100 doesn't have the ICE SPEED RESET position on the WINGSTAB switch as the 300 does- it's either ON or OFF. As a result, the AFM says the WINGSTAB should be left ON until the pilot is sure all residual ice is clear.

In my opinion this is a poor design, and the nuance seems to be overlooked by pilots frequently. It's one thing to turn the WINGSTAB OFF, it's another to affirmatively turn the SWPS schedule back to non-ice.

Thanks for the clarification, that explains why it wasn't mentioned. I do wonder what the thought process was at Embraer in adding that to the 300 but never retrofitting to the 100, especially since boots are more likely to carry ice after exiting icing.

[Username Protected]

[QUOTE=It's one thing to turn the WINGSTAB OFF, it's another to affirmatively turn the SWPS schedule back to non-ice.[/QUOTE]

(Username Protected),
What do you mean by the last sentence: to affirmatively turn the SWPS schedule back to non-ice? In the ERJ-175, we had no control over that, in that, once the SWPS speeds CAS came on, we were committed to landing with those speeds, regardless of the position of the WINGSTAB switch.
in the 100, I don’t know how to turn the logic off.(sorry, if it’s basic)

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected)-

In the Mustang and the Phenom 300, for example, turning the WINGSTAB ON activates the Stall Warning "Ice Mode". Turning WINGSTAB OFF does not change the stall protection mode- a separate switch (Mustang)/ switch position (P-300) does that, so the pilot must actively tell the airplane "we have no residual ice any longer".

In the 100, as you know, just turning the WINGSTAB OFF exits "Ice Mode"- there's no extra step.

I'm not familiar with the 175, but something must make the system exit the higher stall speed mode? You wouldn't land with Ice Speeds in July in Miami, for example, even if you picked up ice at 20,000' in the descent?

[Username Protected]

The Praetor is the same way. you have to manually reset the stall protection mode. But you do have a CAS message to reset the stall protection mode if the ice system is off and you haven't reset the protection.