20240316002459I

Incident · No damage

FAA incident report · Textron 525B · Rifle, CO · March 16, 2024

Date
March 16, 2024 · 17:12 local
Place
Rifle, CO
Phase of flight
Landing: Touchdown
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Operator
KBAA
Damage
No damage
Aircraft
N85VM
Reported as
Textron 525B
Reported engine
Williams FJ44-3A
People aboard
2
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0
Pilot’s certificate
Airline transport
Pilot’s flight hours
26,378 total

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry 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.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

On March 16, 2024, about 2312Z/1712MDT, a Textron/cessna CE-525B operated under 14 cfr/far part 91 experienced a runway overun event during landing at Rifle garfield county airport (kril), Rifle, Colorado. Neither certificated airline transport pilot pilot-in-command (PIC) or second-in-command (SIC) sustained injuries. There were no passengers. The aircraft was not damaged.

According to the operator and statements provided by the PIC and SIC, the aircraft broke out of the clouds and the crew made visual contact with runway 26 at kril. The SIC contacted aspen approach and cancled the IFR flight plan and the flight continued the approach in visual (VFR) conditions. The kril ASOS reported winds 250 degrees at 13 knots. The approach was stable and touchdown was at vref in the touchdown zone. Shortly after touchdown, a significant wind gust caused the aircraft to balloon. The PIC stated that he attempted to maintain directional control. The aircraft floated a considerble distance with idle power touching down a second time. The PIC stated that he considered a rejected landing but considering the wind shear conditions decided to remain on the remaining runway. The PIC stated that he called for “ground flaps” and applied maximum braking. The SIC called out the remaining runway distance while the PIC maintained directional control. The aircraft departed the end of runway 26. The PIC stated they accomplished the aircraft shutdown checklist. Shortly after exiting the aircraft the gusting winds increased and approximately 10 minutes after landing, kril ASOS reported winds from the south at 10 knots gusting to 43 knots with light rain.

The SIC statement concurs with the PIC statement.

The director of operations provided a detailed analyisis of the landing event that included the following supporting documentation: pilot statements, copies of pic/sic airman certificates, weather (kril), risk assesment analysis, aircraft weight and balance, aircraft performance analysis, company flight trip sheets and photographs of the incident. Both the PIC and SIC were drug/alcohol tested and removed from flight status pending the results of their internal investigation of the incident. The aircraft was grounded and inspected for damage. No damage was present.

Both the PIC and SIC hold valid airman certificates and are type rated in the aircraft involved in the incident. Both PIC and SIC hold valid first-class airman medical certificates according to FAA databases.

A review of the PIC and SIC ground and flight training records (operator and 142 training center) indicate both airman were properly trained in the aircraft type and received ground and flight simulator in adverse weather and wind shear training.

The airport weather was reviewed at the time of the incident and concurs with the weather provided by the operator in their analysis of the incident. The aircraft track was reviewed using data provided by ADS-B. The aircraft speed and altitude on final approach to runway 26 appeared to be stable and not excessivively fast or slow.

Root cause determined that the flight crew encountered an un-forecasted weather anonamally and resulting wind shear during the landing phase of flight. The change of wind direction created an unfavorable wind component causing the aircraft to over-run the landing runway,

This incident was thourougly reviewed by the operator and the las vegas FSDO principal inspectors assigned to the operator. No evidence of regulatory or safety non-compliance was found regarding this incident. This incident investigation will be closed based on the operator satifactorly addressing and investigating the incident based on the available data.

As the FAA filed it

ON MARCH 16, 2024, ABOUT 2312Z/1712MDT, A TEXTRON/CESSNA CE-525B OPERATED UNDER 14 CFR/FAR PART 91 EXPERIENCED A RUNWAY OVERUN EVENT DURING LANDING AT RIFLE GARFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT (KRIL), RIFLE, COLORADO. NEITHER CERTIFICATED AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT PILOT-IN-COMMAND (PIC) OR SECOND-IN-COMMAND (SIC) SUSTAINED INJURIES. THERE WERE NO PASSENGERS. THE AIRCRAFT WAS NOT DAMAGED.

ACCORDING TO THE OPERATOR AND STATEMENTS PROVIDED BY THE PIC AND SIC, THE AIRCRAFT BROKE OUT OF THE CLOUDS AND THE CREW MADE VISUAL CONTACT WITH RUNWAY 26 AT KRIL. THE SIC CONTACTED ASPEN APPROACH AND CANCLED THE IFR FLIGHT PLAN AND THE FLIGHT CONTINUED THE APPROACH IN VISUAL (VFR) CONDITIONS. THE KRIL ASOS REPORTED WINDS 250 DEGREES AT 13 KNOTS. THE APPROACH WAS STABLE AND TOUCHDOWN WAS AT VREF IN THE TOUCHDOWN ZONE. SHORTLY AFTER TOUCHDOWN, A SIGNIFICANT WIND GUST CAUSED THE AIRCRAFT TO BALLOON. THE PIC STATED THAT HE ATTEMPTED TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CONTROL. THE AIRCRAFT FLOATED A CONSIDERBLE DISTANCE WITH IDLE POWER TOUCHING DOWN A SECOND TIME. THE PIC STATED THAT HE CONSIDERED A REJECTED LANDING BUT CONSIDERING THE WIND SHEAR CONDITIONS DECIDED TO REMAIN ON THE REMAINING RUNWAY. THE PIC STATED THAT HE CALLED FOR “GROUND FLAPS” AND APPLIED MAXIMUM BRAKING. THE SIC CALLED OUT THE REMAINING RUNWAY DISTANCE WHILE THE PIC MAINTAINED DIRECTIONAL CONTROL. THE AIRCRAFT DEPARTED THE END OF RUNWAY 26. THE PIC STATED THEY ACCOMPLISHED THE AIRCRAFT SHUTDOWN CHECKLIST. SHORTLY AFTER EXITING THE AIRCRAFT THE GUSTING WINDS INCREASED AND APPROXIMATELY 10 MINUTES AFTER LANDING, KRIL ASOS REPORTED WINDS FROM THE SOUTH AT 10 KNOTS GUSTING TO 43 KNOTS WITH LIGHT RAIN.

THE SIC STATEMENT CONCURS WITH THE PIC STATEMENT.

THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS PROVIDED A DETAILED ANALYISIS OF THE LANDING EVENT THAT INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: PILOT STATEMENTS, COPIES OF PIC/SIC AIRMAN CERTIFICATES, WEATHER (KRIL), RISK ASSESMENT ANALYSIS, AIRCRAFT WEIGHT AND BALANCE, AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS, COMPANY FLIGHT TRIP SHEETS AND PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENT. BOTH THE PIC AND SIC WERE DRUG/ALCOHOL TESTED AND REMOVED FROM FLIGHT STATUS PENDING THE RESULTS OF THEIR INTERNAL INVESTIGATION OF THE INCIDENT. THE AIRCRAFT WAS GROUNDED AND INSPECTED FOR DAMAGE. NO DAMAGE WAS PRESENT.

BOTH THE PIC AND SIC HOLD VALID AIRMAN CERTIFICATES AND ARE TYPE RATED IN THE AIRCRAFT INVOLVED IN THE INCIDENT. BOTH PIC AND SIC HOLD VALID FIRST-CLASS AIRMAN MEDICAL CERTIFICATES ACCORDING TO FAA DATABASES.

A REVIEW OF THE PIC AND SIC GROUND AND FLIGHT TRAINING RECORDS (OPERATOR AND 142 TRAINING CENTER) INDICATE BOTH AIRMAN WERE PROPERLY TRAINED IN THE AIRCRAFT TYPE AND RECEIVED GROUND AND FLIGHT SIMULATOR IN ADVERSE WEATHER AND WIND SHEAR TRAINING.

THE AIRPORT WEATHER WAS REVIEWED AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT AND CONCURS WITH THE WEATHER PROVIDED BY THE OPERATOR IN THEIR ANALYSIS OF THE INCIDENT. THE AIRCRAFT TRACK WAS REVIEWED USING DATA PROVIDED BY ADS-B. THE AIRCRAFT SPEED AND ALTITUDE ON FINAL APPROACH TO RUNWAY 26 APPEARED TO BE STABLE AND NOT EXCESSIVIVELY FAST OR SLOW.

ROOT CAUSE DETERMINED THAT THE FLIGHT CREW ENCOUNTERED AN UN-FORECASTED WEATHER ANONAMALLY AND RESULTING WIND SHEAR DURING THE LANDING PHASE OF FLIGHT. THE CHANGE OF WIND DIRECTION CREATED AN UNFAVORABLE WIND COMPONENT CAUSING THE AIRCRAFT TO OVER-RUN THE LANDING RUNWAY,

THIS INCIDENT WAS THOUROUGLY REVIEWED BY THE OPERATOR AND THE LAS VEGAS FSDO PRINCIPAL INSPECTORS ASSIGNED TO THE OPERATOR. NO EVIDENCE OF REGULATORY OR SAFETY NON-COMPLIANCE WAS FOUND REGARDING THIS INCIDENT. THIS INCIDENT INVESTIGATION WILL BE CLOSED BASED ON THE OPERATOR SATIFACTORLY ADDRESSING AND INVESTIGATING THE INCIDENT BASED ON THE AVAILABLE DATA.