37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1470948 |
Time | |
Date | 201708 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | A321 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Taxi |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Normal Brake System |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
First officer (first officer) was pilot flying I was pilot monitoring. Pilot flying called for auto brakes off landing (flaps full configuration). Load planning had us tankering fuel (landing fuel of 11;600 lbs) landing weight was approximately 2000 pounds under max landing weight for the A321 aircraft. Upon landing first officer applied heavy brake pressure until slowing to approximately 70 knots indicated. Upon exiting runway the right brake temps were higher than normal. Upon reaching the gate the temp indicators were above 700 but were within limits of each other. The hot brakes were discussed in my post flight and the post flight walk around revealed no abnormalities. I greeted the next captain and advised him of the high brake temperatures. His first officer then did a preflight inspection and noted no abnormalities. After both inspections were completed; a nearby mechanic noticed the fuse plugs giving way and the right mains then deflated. That captain then notified me that the mains had gone flat and we discussed the situation. My concern is that the fuse plugs had not given way through two inspections and the third 'accidental inspection' may not have occurred if the ground personnel hadn't noticed that they finally gave way. This could have made for a more critical situation had it not have been caught.more reliance upon auto braking systems I feel like the first officer's intention was trying to make it 'smoother' by having auto brakes off. Auto brake systems do a better job at this as this case demonstrated. More awareness that landing the 321's fairly heavy takes much more energy to slow the aircraft than the smaller 320 or 319; I know that sounds obvious to everyone but I feel it often gets overlooked.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A321 Captain reported wheel fuse plugs melting at the gate after a First Officer landing using firm manual braking. The deflated tires were noticed by a nearby mechanic after preflight inspections had been completed.
Narrative: FO (First Officer) was pilot flying I was pilot monitoring. Pilot Flying called for auto brakes off landing (Flaps Full configuration). Load Planning had us tankering fuel (Landing fuel of 11;600 lbs) Landing weight was approximately 2000 LBS under max Landing weight for the A321 Aircraft. Upon Landing FO applied heavy brake pressure until slowing to approximately 70 knots indicated. Upon exiting runway the right brake temps were higher than normal. Upon reaching the gate the temp indicators were above 700 but were within limits of each other. The hot brakes were discussed in my post flight and the post flight walk around revealed no abnormalities. I greeted the next Captain and advised him of the high brake temperatures. His FO then did a preflight inspection and noted no abnormalities. After both inspections were completed; a nearby mechanic noticed the fuse plugs giving way and the right mains then deflated. That captain then notified me that the mains had gone flat and we discussed the situation. My concern is that the fuse plugs had not given way through two inspections and the third 'accidental inspection' may not have occurred if the ground personnel hadn't noticed that they finally gave way. This could have made for a more critical situation had it not have been caught.More reliance upon auto braking systems I feel like the FO's intention was trying to make it 'smoother' by having auto brakes off. Auto brake systems do a better job at this as this case demonstrated. More awareness that landing the 321's fairly heavy takes much more energy to slow the aircraft than the smaller 320 or 319; I know that sounds obvious to everyone but I feel it often gets overlooked.
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.