Narrative:

During the flare portion of the landing. The aircraft was held 1 or 2 ft off the landing surface. Airspeed was slowly decreasing until the aircraft abruptly settled onto the runway. The landing itself was firm. There was no bouncing on the runway. The altitude of the aircraft during landing was more nose-high than usual, but my first officer and I were not certain of a tail strike by any means. Post flight inspection of the aircraft revealed some scratches to the underside of the aircraft near the lavatory tank access door. The #2 VHF antenna aft of the main landing gear was not damaged. This gave us some belief that my crew might not be responsible for the fail strike, or if it occurred at all. The scratches and general filthiness of the belly of the aircraft were alerted to maintenance personnel. They told me the aircraft was going to the maintenance facility for the evening anyway. To avoid this problem, I suggest carrying slightly more airspeed to touchdown, but that suggestion only covers the tail strike problem. It appears my grief from this problem is just surfacing. The fact that I failed to write-up the apparent tail strike is causing concern at the company and FAA level. I maintain that I didn't write up the alleged tail strike because I wasn't aware of the apparent damage. I have not been trained to recognize imperfections, blemishes, scratches, gouging, corrosion, etc. In the past, my colleagues and I have importuned maintenance personnel to correct or identify or clarify a discrepancy, only be told it's a carry over or the problem is not a problem or that the aircraft is ok for dispatch anyway. If I don't accept an aircraft at this point, I invariably will be questioned by members of the flight operations department. In my particular case, the maintenance fellow seemed cavalier about the scratches on the belly beneath the tail section. Based on my past recollection of scratched or otherwise blemished aircraft that were approved for service. I elected to not write it up. More suggestions: teach crewmembers to better identify external imperfections. 2) have a list available shaving items on the carryover.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TAIL STRIKE.

Narrative: DURING THE FLARE PORTION OF THE LNDG. THE ACFT WAS HELD 1 OR 2 FT OFF THE LNDG SURFACE. AIRSPD WAS SLOWLY DECREASING UNTIL THE ACFT ABRUPTLY SETTLED ONTO THE RWY. THE LNDG ITSELF WAS FIRM. THERE WAS NO BOUNCING ON THE RWY. THE ALT OF THE ACFT DURING LNDG WAS MORE NOSE-HIGH THAN USUAL, BUT MY FO AND I WERE NOT CERTAIN OF A TAIL STRIKE BY ANY MEANS. POST FLT INSPECTION OF THE ACFT REVEALED SOME SCRATCHES TO THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ACFT NEAR THE LAVATORY TANK ACCESS DOOR. THE #2 VHF ANTENNA AFT OF THE MAIN LNDG GEAR WAS NOT DAMAGED. THIS GAVE US SOME BELIEF THAT MY CREW MIGHT NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAIL STRIKE, OR IF IT OCCURRED AT ALL. THE SCRATCHES AND GENERAL FILTHINESS OF THE BELLY OF THE ACFT WERE ALERTED TO MAINT PERSONNEL. THEY TOLD ME THE ACFT WAS GOING TO THE MAINT FACILITY FOR THE EVENING ANYWAY. TO AVOID THIS PROB, I SUGGEST CARRYING SLIGHTLY MORE AIRSPD TO TOUCHDOWN, BUT THAT SUGGESTION ONLY COVERS THE TAIL STRIKE PROB. IT APPEARS MY GRIEF FROM THIS PROB IS JUST SURFACING. THE FACT THAT I FAILED TO WRITE-UP THE APPARENT TAIL STRIKE IS CAUSING CONCERN AT THE COMPANY AND FAA LEVEL. I MAINTAIN THAT I DIDN'T WRITE UP THE ALLEGED TAIL STRIKE BECAUSE I WASN'T AWARE OF THE APPARENT DAMAGE. I HAVE NOT BEEN TRAINED TO RECOGNIZE IMPERFECTIONS, BLEMISHES, SCRATCHES, GOUGING, CORROSION, ETC. IN THE PAST, MY COLLEAGUES AND I HAVE IMPORTUNED MAINT PERSONNEL TO CORRECT OR IDENT OR CLARIFY A DISCREPANCY, ONLY BE TOLD IT'S A CARRY OVER OR THE PROB IS NOT A PROB OR THAT THE ACFT IS OK FOR DISPATCH ANYWAY. IF I DON'T ACCEPT AN ACFT AT THIS POINT, I INVARIABLY WILL BE QUESTIONED BY MEMBERS OF THE FLT OPS DEPT. IN MY PARTICULAR CASE, THE MAINT FELLOW SEEMED CAVALIER ABOUT THE SCRATCHES ON THE BELLY BENEATH THE TAIL SECTION. BASED ON MY PAST RECOLLECTION OF SCRATCHED OR OTHERWISE BLEMISHED ACFT THAT WERE APPROVED FOR SVC. I ELECTED TO NOT WRITE IT UP. MORE SUGGESTIONS: TEACH CREWMEMBERS TO BETTER IDENT EXTERNAL IMPERFECTIONS. 2) HAVE A LIST AVAILABLE SHAVING ITEMS ON THE CARRYOVER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.