 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier flight crew reported an uneventful landing from an unstable approach instead of executing go-around per standard procedures.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1749607 |
| Time | |
| Date | 202007 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Flying Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach |
Narrative:
Cleared for visual to runway X and turned inside zzzzz from 4;000. I knew we were high but we had slowed and got gear out early. Squared the base to final turn outside ZZZZZ1 and continued to configure. Fully configured at 1;100; but still high on the VASI; so we decided to continue to 500 to meet stable approach criteria. Passing 500 we were on VASI and engines coming up we landed at the 1;200 mark; 8 seconds from 50 feet; and taxied in uneventfully. Upon gate arrival I pulled an approach report and noticed that we had a -1;750 vertical speed which I think happened between 2;000 and 1;000 feet. There was some ground thermal bouncing and it could have momentarily exceeded -1000 below 1;000.this was my first trip back since april and I should have given myself more room to get down and configure.hindsight being 20/20 I think a go-around would have been a more appropriate choice; in order to give us more room to set up for the approach.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier flight crew reported an uneventful landing from an unstable approach instead of executing go-around per standard procedures.
Narrative: Cleared for visual to Runway X and turned inside ZZZZZ from 4;000. I knew we were high but we had slowed and got gear out early. Squared the base to final turn outside ZZZZZ1 and continued to configure. Fully configured at 1;100; but still high on the VASI; so we decided to continue to 500 to meet stable approach criteria. Passing 500 we were on VASI and engines coming up we landed at the 1;200 mark; 8 seconds from 50 feet; and taxied in uneventfully. Upon gate arrival I pulled an approach report and noticed that we had a -1;750 vertical speed which I think happened between 2;000 and 1;000 feet. There was some ground thermal bouncing and it could have momentarily exceeded -1000 below 1;000.This was my first trip back since April and I should have given myself more room to get down and configure.Hindsight being 20/20 I think a go-around would have been a more appropriate choice; in order to give us more room to set up for the approach.
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.