Narrative:

On approach into edfh we had planned on runway 21. We had requested landing data for both runways at flaps 25; wet runway (RA reported on ATIS) and idle reverse. Tower assigned runway 03 in the descent. We were planning on using max manual braking for a smooth braking application for our passengers. The flight was picture perfect from takeoff all the way through the approach. We were configured early and had all checklists complete with time to spare. Glideslope and localizer were looking good and the touchdown was very smooth. Immediately after touchdown it became obvious that something was wrong. We were hydroplaning and directional control was extremely difficult. At this point max reverse and max braking was necessary. After gaining directional control; I realized that due to hydroplaning our brakes were not effective at all. We stopped past foxtrot. Due to the quick reactions of the crew we were able to maintain safety. Once we realized how poor the runway conditions were; thrust reverser's were already deployed; thus go around was not an option. The water on the runway should have been reported as standing water more than 1/8th of an inch. Braking action was poor under these conditions which we reported for the safety of other arriving aircraft.once we parked; we checked brake temps and all were indicating 0 or 1. That indicates to me that anti-skid was preventing the brakes from engaging at all; in spite of max braking being used throughout the entire landing roll. I talked to the crew that landed after us. They had planned a conservative configuration due to our poor braking action report and still landed past foxtrot. Subsequent aircraft reported difficulty turning onto foxtrot as well.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B747 flight crew reported landing at EDFH during a rain storm; to find nil braking action and poor directional control. Control is regained; but braking action remained poor and required most of the 11;400 foot available runway to stop using reverse thrust.

Narrative: On approach into EDFH we had planned on Runway 21. We had requested landing data for both runways at Flaps 25; wet runway (RA reported on ATIS) and idle reverse. Tower assigned Runway 03 in the descent. We were planning on using max manual braking for a smooth braking application for our passengers. The flight was picture perfect from takeoff all the way through the approach. We were configured early and had all checklists complete with time to spare. Glideslope and localizer were looking good and the touchdown was very smooth. Immediately after touchdown it became obvious that something was wrong. We were hydroplaning and directional control was extremely difficult. At this point max reverse and max braking was necessary. After gaining directional control; I realized that due to hydroplaning our brakes were not effective at all. We stopped past Foxtrot. Due to the quick reactions of the crew we were able to maintain safety. Once we realized how poor the runway conditions were; thrust reverser's were already deployed; thus go around was not an option. The water on the runway should have been reported as standing water more than 1/8th of an inch. Braking action was poor under these conditions which we reported for the safety of other arriving aircraft.Once we parked; we checked brake temps and all were indicating 0 or 1. That indicates to me that anti-skid was preventing the brakes from engaging at all; in spite of max braking being used throughout the entire landing roll. I talked to the crew that landed after us. They had planned a conservative configuration due to our poor braking action report and still landed past Foxtrot. Subsequent aircraft reported difficulty turning onto Foxtrot as well.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.