 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Emb-505 flight crew reported executing a go-around after experiencing elevator control difficulties on approach.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1560552 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201807 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | EMB-505 / Phenom 300 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Elevator ControlSystem |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Flying First Officer |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
During approach; I was acting as the PF and sic. At about 400 feet or so the elevator controls [felt] a little stiff. I used the electrical trim but there was no relief to the stiff feeling of the elevator control and the aircraft wanted to pitch up. I found myself using my full strength to bring the nose down but the aircraft continued with a high pitch attitude. I mentioned it to the captain and we exchanged controls and he found himself also having to put full force forward to prevent the aircraft from pitching up. We did a go-around. We did a left downwind turn for [the] runway; during the turn the aircraft was not very controllable and the captain attempted to use the backup trim but there was no forward pressure relief. The captain had to use bank angles greater than 45 degrees to keep the nose down. We also found that the aircraft was more controllable with the flaps up; perhaps do to the downwash that initially gives a nose up moment with flaps extended; so we decided to leave the flaps retracted as we did not want to aggravate the situation. We performed a visual approach with no flaps. We did an expedited brief to cover the increase vref speed with no flaps and the runway length. Upon touchdown we both got on the brakes and proceeded to taxi to the FBO without any further incident.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: EMB-505 flight crew reported executing a go-around after experiencing elevator control difficulties on approach.
Narrative: During approach; I was acting as the PF and SIC. At about 400 feet or so the elevator controls [felt] a little stiff. I used the electrical trim but there was no relief to the stiff feeling of the elevator control and the aircraft wanted to pitch up. I found myself using my full strength to bring the nose down but the aircraft continued with a high pitch attitude. I mentioned it to the Captain and we exchanged controls and he found himself also having to put full force forward to prevent the aircraft from pitching up. We did a go-around. We did a left downwind turn for [the] runway; during the turn the aircraft was not very controllable and the Captain attempted to use the backup trim but there was no forward pressure relief. The Captain had to use bank angles greater than 45 degrees to keep the nose down. We also found that the aircraft was more controllable with the flaps up; perhaps do to the downwash that initially gives a nose up moment with flaps extended; so we decided to leave the flaps retracted as we did not want to aggravate the situation. We performed a visual approach with no flaps. We did an expedited brief to cover the increase Vref speed with no flaps and the runway length. Upon touchdown we both got on the brakes and proceeded to taxi to the FBO without any further incident.
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.