# Incident 19980312009289I: Doug DC871F, Toledo, OH, March 12, 1998

- Type: FAA incident report (Accident/Incident Data System), as reported
- Date: March 12, 1998, 13:42 local time
- Place: Toledo, OH
- Airport: Toledo Express
- Damage: Minor damage
- Phase of flight: Level Off Touchdown
- Operating rules: Air carrier (Part 121)
- Operator: IXXA
- Location: 41.6639° N, 83.5552° W: Placed by OpenAirDocs: center of Toledo, OH, within about 6 miles (OpenAirDocs)
- Nearby events: https://openairdocs.org/map.md?lat=41.6639&lon=-83.5552&mi=10
- Aircraft: N828BX, a cancelled registration (https://openairdocs.org/deregistered/N828BX-2014-05-01) (OpenAirDocs)
- Registry model: Douglas DC-8-71F (registry code 302199D, https://openairdocs.org/model/douglas-dc-8-71f) (OpenAirDocs)
- Registry engine: CFM International CFM56 series (registry code 13802, https://openairdocs.org/engine/cfm-international-cfm56-series) (OpenAirDocs)
- Reported make and model: DOUG DC871F
- Reported engine: GE CFM56*
- People aboard: 3
- Fatal injuries: 0
- Pilot flight hours: 14,820 total, 2,241 in this make and model, 103 in the last 90 days
- FAA source: FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal (https://asip.faa.gov/)
- Page: https://openairdocs.org/incident/19980312009289I

## Narrative

As the FAA filed it, in capitals; the FAA replaces private details with ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^.

NARRATIVE: A MEETING WITH THE CAPTAIN SWEENEY, FO KEVIN MOLDEN, AND FE BILL CHOATE, THE CREW ON 826BX, WAS HELD IN TOLEDO, OHIO ON MARCH 13. ALSO PRESENT WAS CAPTAIN AL BROOKS. CAPT. JEFF NAUMAN, FE STEVE COHOON AND MYSELF, HARLAN L. BENJAMIN. THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING WAS TO INVESTIGATE THE POD STRIKE THAT OCCURRED THE PREVIOUS DAY AT TOLEDO. DURING THE DISCUSSION WITH THE CREW, IT WAS LEARNED THAT THE CREW HAD ADEQUATE REST, WAS FULLY QUALIFIED AND TRAINED TO FLY THE EQUIPMENT THAT EVENING. THERE WERE NO CONFLICTS BETWEEN CREW MEMBERS AND NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ANY CRM PROBLEMS EXISTED. THE FLIGHT PLANNING WAS ADEQUATE AND VFR CONDITIONS FORECAST AND EXISTED AT TOLEDO. THE FIRST OFFICER WAS FLYING THE AIRCRAFT AND THE FLIGHT TO TOLEDO WAS UNEVENTFUL. UPON ARRIVAL AT TOLEDO THE ATIS INFORMATION WAS "HOTEL". WINDS 230 @ 14 GUST 22, 10 MILES VISIBILITY, 3700 FOOT BROKEN CLOUDS, 4600 FOOT OVERCAST. (VFR) TOWER REPORTED A DC-8 THAT LANDED IN FRONT OF THEM THAT THEY EXPERIENCED A + OR -5KNOT VARIATION IN AIRSPEED BELOW 1000 FEET. THE CREW REPORTED THEY DISCUSSED THE WINDSHEAR AND THE TECHNIQUES THAT WOULD BE USED FOR THE APPROACH AND LANDING. THEY ADDED 13 KNOTS TO THE THRESHOLD SPEED WHICH WAS CORRECT ACCORDING TO OUR PROCEDURES. ON FINAL APPROACH THE CREW REPORTED ENCOUNTERING TURBULENCE BELOW 1000 FEET. THE DEVIATION FROM THE PLAN APPROACH WAS THE CRAB ANGLE ON FINAL. WITH THE ATIS REPORTED WINDS OF 230 DEGREES AND LANDING ON RUNWAY 25, THE CROSSWIND WAS 20 DEGREES OF THE LEFT WHICH MEANT THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD A LEFT CRAB ANGLE. HOWEVER, ALL THREE CREW MEMBERS REPORT HOLDING A RIGHT CRAB ANGLE ON FINAL. ALL CREW MEMBERS REPORTED A VARIATIONS OF AIRSPEED ON FINAL WITH A WIND SHEAR AND 10 KNOTS INDICATED AIRSPEED DECREASE AT 200 FEET. ALL THREE CREW MEMBERS INDICATED THE TOUCH DOWN WAS NORMAL. THE CAPTAIN AND THE FO REPORTED LANDING ON THE RIGHT MAIN. THE FE THOUGHT IT WAS THE LEFT MAIN. SIMULTANEOUSLY ON TOUCHDOWN, THE FE CALLED NO SPOILERS. THE CAPTAIN OBSERVED THE SPOILER HANDLE MOVING BACK AND FORTH AND REACHED DOWN AND PULLED THE HANDLE FULL AFT. AT THE SAME TIME, THE RIGHT WING CAME UP SUDDENLY AND THE AIRCRAFT BECAME AIRBORNE. THE FE REPORTED SEEING THE FO PUT "LARGE AMOUNT OF RIGHT AILERON" BUT THE WING CONTINUED TO RISE. UPON QUESTION THE FE ABOUT WHAT WAS A "LARGE AMOUNT", HE INDICATED IT WAS MORE THAN 45 DEGREES. THE FO DIDN'T REMEMBER BUT BASICALLY JUST REACTED. THE CAPTAIN FELT THE WING COMING UP AND REACHED FOR THE CONTROL COLUMN. HE STATED THAT WHEN HE HAD TRANSITION FROM LOOKING DOWN TO LOOKING OUTSIDE, HE KNEW THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE HIT A POD DUE TO THE ANGLE OF THE AIRCRAFT. ALTHOUGH IN HIS WRITTEN REPORT, THE CAPTAIN REPORTED "GRABBING THE CONTROL COLUMN", HE WAS INDICATING WITH HIS HANDS DURING THE INTERVIEW THAT HE PUSHED FORWARD ON THE COLUMN AND PUT NO INPUTS WITH THE AILERON. ALL BY THE CREW. BASED UPON THESE ADVISORIES AND ATIS WIND REPORTED AT 270/10G20 THE CREW APPLIED ADDITIVES TO THE APPROACH SPEED TO TARGET VAP AT 150 KTS. VTH WAS CALCULATED AT 137 KTS, RESULTING IN A 13 KT. ADDITIVE. ON INITIAL APPROACH, THE TOWER REPORTED SURFACE WINDS AT 230/12G20. FIRST OFFICER MOLDEN STATED THAT THE CRAB HELD ON THE APPROACH WAS A RIGHT CRAB AND NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS WIND DIRECTION AT THE SURFACE. THE CREW AGREED THAT AIRSPEED FLUCTUATIONS OF +/- 10 KTS WERE EXPERIENCED ON FINAL. FIRST OFFICER MOLDEN STATED THAT HIS WRITTEN REPORT OF HIS ACTIONS ON THE APPROACH AND TOUCHDOWN WERE "PROBABLY NOT" AS ACCURATE AS HIS LATER RECALL. TOUCHDOWN: THERE WAS SOME DISCREPANCY IN THE CREW REPORT REGARDING INITIAL TOUCHDOWN ON RUNWAY 25. THE PILOTS STATED THAT THEY WERE SURE THAT THE RIGHT MAIN LANDING GEAR CONTACTED THE RUNWAY FIRST. THE FLIGHT ENGINEER STATED THAT HE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE LEFT MAIN LANDING GEAR CONTACTED FIRST. UPON TOUCHDOWN, THE FLIGHT ENGINEER RELAYED A "NO SPOILERS" CALL AS HE OBSERVED NO SPOILER EXTENDED LIGHT ILLUMINATION. HIS OBSERVATION OF THE MLG SPOILER LOCKOUT LIGHT WAS NOT UNTIL A LATER POINT IN THE LANDING AND ROLLOUT. CAPTAIN SWEENEY STATED THAT UPON THE "NO SPOILER" CALL, HIS ATTENTION WAS FOCUSED UPON THE SPOILER HANDLE AND ITS UNUSUAL MOVEMENT. HE STATED THAT THE HANDLE WAS OSCILLATING FORWARD AND AFT UNLIKE ANY MOVEMENT HE HAD BEEN FAMILIAR WITH IN PRIOR EXPERIENCE. THROUGHOUT THE INTERVIEW, CAPTAIN SWEENEY WAS EMPHATIC REGARDING HIS PREOCCUPATION WITH THE SPOILER HANDLE AND HIS EFFORTS TO DEPLOY THE SPOILERS MANUALLY. FIRST OFFICER MOLDEN AND FLIGHT ENGINEER CHOATE REPORTED THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTER INITIAL TOUCHDOWN, THE AIRCRAFT BECAME AIRBORNE AND STATED THAT THEY FELT AN "EXTREME" OR "SEVERE" GUST ACTING ON THE AIRCRAFT TO CAUSE A PITCH FORWARD AND LEFT ROLL. CONTROL DIFFICULTIES ENSUED IN SPITE OF WHAT WERE CONSIDERED IMMEDIATE AND APPROPRIATE CONTROL INPUTS. THE CREW WAS CONSISTENT IN THE OPINION THAT THE AIRCRAFT WAS "LIFTED" FROM BEHIND TO CAUSE A NOSE LOW ATTITUDE AND SUBSEQUENT "WHEELBARROW" TOUCHDOWN NOSE FIRST. MR. MOLDEN STATED THAT HE DID NOT CONSCIOUSLY LOWER THE NOSE. RATHER, HE RECALLED THAT BACK PRESSURE WAS MAINTAINED AND AGAIN STATED THAT THE AIRCRAFT DID NOT RESPOND TO HIS INPUTS. FLIGHT ENGINEER CHOATE CORROBORATED F/O MOLDEN'S ASSERTION THAT FULL AND PROMPT CONTROL INPUT DID NOT RESULT IN APPROPRIATE AIRCRAFT RESPONSE. THERE WAS SOME DISAGREEMENT AS TO THE NUMBER OF AIRBORNE EXCURSIONS EXPERIENCED AFTER THE INITIAL TOUCHDOWN. THE CAPTAIN AND FLIGHT ENGINEER INDICATED ONLY ONE WHILE THE FIRST OFFICER "THOUGHT" THERE "MIGHT HAVE BEEN TWO". ALL AGREED THAT THE AIRCRAFT ACTED IN A MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH ANY KNOWN PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE. ALL AGREED THAT THE AIRCRAFT SPOILERS WORKED AND PROPERLY AND EXTENDED UPON NOSE-WHEEL CONTACT WITH THE RUNWAY. SOME DISAGREEMENT WAS EVIDENT AS TO ACTUAL TOUCHDOWN SPEED. NONE OF THE CREW APPEARED CONFIDENT OR AWARE OF THE SPEED OF THE AIRCRAFT AT INITIAL TOUCHDOWN. CAPTAIN SWEENEY WAS ASKED HIS OPINION OF HIS JUDGMENT IN ALLOWING THE F/O TO CONTINUE THE LANDING GIVEN REPORTS OF LOW-LEVEL WINDSHEAR. HIS REPLY INDICATED THAT GIVEN HIS EXPERIENCE, THE COMPETENCE AND COMPANY EXPERIENCE OF HIS F/O, AND HIS ASSESSMENT OF CONDITIONS AS REPORTED, HIS ACTIONS WERE APPROPRIATE. SALIENT INTERVIEW POINTS: *TOWER REPORTED WIND INCONSISTENT WITH AIRCRAFT CONTROL INPUT REQUIRED ON APPROACH. *CAPTAIN SWEENEY'S CONSISTENT REITERATION OF HIS DISTRACTION WITH SPOILER HANDLE ACTION SUBSEQUENT TO TOUCHDOWN. *FIRST OFFICER AND FLIGHT ENGINEER RECOLLECTIN OF FULL CONTROL INPUT IN RESPONSE TO AIRCRAFT MOTION WITH NO NOTICEABLE RESULT.*CREW WAS NOT CERTAIN OF TOUCHDOWN SPEED. *EMPHATIC CREW STATEMENTS REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF AN UNUSUAL METEOROLOGICAL OCCURRENCE AT TOUCHDOWN.

From the FAA Accident/Incident Data System. Reports are matched to registry aircraft by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry's history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model. For accidents, the NTSB's own investigation is the fuller record.

---
OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.