Narrative:

We were cleared visual runway 25L lax to follow a B767-300 with 7-8 mi spacing VFR. The approach was normal until just after 100 ft AGL when the aircraft rolled left. I was able to stop the roll at approximately 20 degrees angle of bank momentarily, then the aircraft rolled hard right to approximately 45 degrees angle of bank. We went through several gyrations to gain control and prevent wingtip contact while executing a go around. The tower informed us of a possible tail strike on go around. I did not think we got the tail, but we ran a tail strike checklist and depressurized the aircraft for landing. After checking everything over, an uneventful landing was made. An aircraft log entry was made and the aircraft was thoroughly checked over by maintenance. The first officer and myself both postflted the aircraft and saw no damage. There were no passenger or crew injuries. Consideration needs to be given to increased separation from heavy aircraft when conditions are favorable for wake turbulence of an extended nature. Also, increase separation for low visual approachs where autoplt is required at low altitudes. If I had not been hand flying the aircraft when this occurred the outcome may not have been as favorable. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was flying a B757-200 that was 7-8 mi ahead of him during the approach. The wind was reported to be from 340 degrees at 4 KTS, but after the incident, the captain said that the controller reported the actual wind to be 040 degrees at 5 KTS. He also said that the skies were clear with at least 20 mi of visibility. As the reporter was preparing to flare the aircraft suddenly rolled to the left. The captain said that he applied rudder and aileron against the roll and it stopped and the aircraft seemed to pause with the bank at 15-20 degrees of bank to the left. According to the reporter, the aircraft then sharply rolled to the right with the captain putting full aileron and rudder travel against the roll. The aircraft continued the right roll to 40-45 degrees of bank and the captain advanced the thrust levers to go around power. The aircraft rolled past wings level and oscillated several times left and right as it accelerated in a nose high attitude. It touched down firmly then climbed on a go around profile. The local controller reported a possible tailstrike during the go around, but the reporter thinks that he may have seen the right wingtip strobe light reflecting off of the runway surface during the extreme right bank period. The aircraft was inspected by the flight crew and by maintenance personnel postflt and no evidence of runway contact by the aircraft structure was found. The flight data computer was read at the request of the reporter and his union and the flight crew, maintenance personnel and their chief pilot reviewed the data. The recorder showed bank angles of 15 degrees or less. The crew disputes this and the maintenance personnel agreed that since the aircraft only records the bank reading once a second it could easily miss an extreme actual bank angle on an aircraft with a high roll rate. The reporter has had aerobatic training in the military and unusual attitude training in the air carrier's simulator. He also was an instructor for his air carrier on another aircraft. Supplemental information from acn 390816: visual inspection by maintenance. Captain and first officer accomplished with no evidence of damage found. Callback conversation with reporter acn #390816 revealed the following information: the aircraft rolled to the left, an estimated 20 degrees, then it rolled to the right approximately the same amount. The reporter said that neither pilot looked at the attitude indicator and based their estimations on the angle of the threshold and runway lights. He said that both pilots called for a go around in the flight station at the same time and he started the thrust levers forward just as the captain was advancing them and he also followed the captain's control inputs by placing his hand lightly on the control wheel. As the aircraft was rotated it struck the runway firmly just as the thrust was becoming effective. The tower controller reported that the aircraft's tail had struck the runway, but no evidence of this was found. The crew believes that the controller saw the reflection of the wingtip strobe lights off of the runway surface. The crew and the controllers were surprised by the wake and all parties agreed, accordingto the reporter, in a post incident discussion that the separation was greater than that required by regulations.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR B757 FLC HITS THE WAKE OF A B767 THAT LANDED 7 NM IN FRONT OF THEM. THE FLC MADE A GAR AFTER RECOVERING FROM SEVERAL ROLLS AT VERY LOW ALT. THE ACFT DID TOUCH DOWN DURING THEIR GAR.

Narrative: WE WERE CLRED VISUAL RWY 25L LAX TO FOLLOW A B767-300 WITH 7-8 MI SPACING VFR. THE APCH WAS NORMAL UNTIL JUST AFTER 100 FT AGL WHEN THE ACFT ROLLED L. I WAS ABLE TO STOP THE ROLL AT APPROX 20 DEGS ANGLE OF BANK MOMENTARILY, THEN THE ACFT ROLLED HARD R TO APPROX 45 DEGS ANGLE OF BANK. WE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL GYRATIONS TO GAIN CTL AND PREVENT WINGTIP CONTACT WHILE EXECUTING A GAR. THE TWR INFORMED US OF A POSSIBLE TAIL STRIKE ON GAR. I DID NOT THINK WE GOT THE TAIL, BUT WE RAN A TAIL STRIKE CHKLIST AND DEPRESSURIZED THE ACFT FOR LNDG. AFTER CHKING EVERYTHING OVER, AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG WAS MADE. AN ACFT LOG ENTRY WAS MADE AND THE ACFT WAS THOROUGHLY CHKED OVER BY MAINT. THE FO AND MYSELF BOTH POSTFLTED THE ACFT AND SAW NO DAMAGE. THERE WERE NO PAX OR CREW INJURIES. CONSIDERATION NEEDS TO BE GIVEN TO INCREASED SEPARATION FROM HVY ACFT WHEN CONDITIONS ARE FAVORABLE FOR WAKE TURB OF AN EXTENDED NATURE. ALSO, INCREASE SEPARATION FOR LOW VISUAL APCHS WHERE AUTOPLT IS REQUIRED AT LOW ALTS. IF I HAD NOT BEEN HAND FLYING THE ACFT WHEN THIS OCCURRED THE OUTCOME MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AS FAVORABLE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS FLYING A B757-200 THAT WAS 7-8 MI AHEAD OF HIM DURING THE APCH. THE WIND WAS RPTED TO BE FROM 340 DEGS AT 4 KTS, BUT AFTER THE INCIDENT, THE CAPT SAID THAT THE CTLR RPTED THE ACTUAL WIND TO BE 040 DEGS AT 5 KTS. HE ALSO SAID THAT THE SKIES WERE CLR WITH AT LEAST 20 MI OF VISIBILITY. AS THE RPTR WAS PREPARING TO FLARE THE ACFT SUDDENLY ROLLED TO THE L. THE CAPT SAID THAT HE APPLIED RUDDER AND AILERON AGAINST THE ROLL AND IT STOPPED AND THE ACFT SEEMED TO PAUSE WITH THE BANK AT 15-20 DEGS OF BANK TO THE L. ACCORDING TO THE RPTR, THE ACFT THEN SHARPLY ROLLED TO THE R WITH THE CAPT PUTTING FULL AILERON AND RUDDER TRAVEL AGAINST THE ROLL. THE ACFT CONTINUED THE R ROLL TO 40-45 DEGS OF BANK AND THE CAPT ADVANCED THE THRUST LEVERS TO GAR PWR. THE ACFT ROLLED PAST WINGS LEVEL AND OSCILLATED SEVERAL TIMES L AND R AS IT ACCELERATED IN A NOSE HIGH ATTITUDE. IT TOUCHED DOWN FIRMLY THEN CLBED ON A GAR PROFILE. THE LCL CTLR RPTED A POSSIBLE TAILSTRIKE DURING THE GAR, BUT THE RPTR THINKS THAT HE MAY HAVE SEEN THE R WINGTIP STROBE LIGHT REFLECTING OFF OF THE RWY SURFACE DURING THE EXTREME R BANK PERIOD. THE ACFT WAS INSPECTED BY THE FLC AND BY MAINT PERSONNEL POSTFLT AND NO EVIDENCE OF RWY CONTACT BY THE ACFT STRUCTURE WAS FOUND. THE FLT DATA COMPUTER WAS READ AT THE REQUEST OF THE RPTR AND HIS UNION AND THE FLC, MAINT PERSONNEL AND THEIR CHIEF PLT REVIEWED THE DATA. THE RECORDER SHOWED BANK ANGLES OF 15 DEGS OR LESS. THE CREW DISPUTES THIS AND THE MAINT PERSONNEL AGREED THAT SINCE THE ACFT ONLY RECORDS THE BANK READING ONCE A SECOND IT COULD EASILY MISS AN EXTREME ACTUAL BANK ANGLE ON AN ACFT WITH A HIGH ROLL RATE. THE RPTR HAS HAD AEROBATIC TRAINING IN THE MIL AND UNUSUAL ATTITUDE TRAINING IN THE ACR'S SIMULATOR. HE ALSO WAS AN INSTRUCTOR FOR HIS ACR ON ANOTHER ACFT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 390816: VISUAL INSPECTION BY MAINT. CAPT AND FO ACCOMPLISHED WITH NO EVIDENCE OF DAMAGE FOUND. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN #390816 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE ACFT ROLLED TO THE L, AN ESTIMATED 20 DEGS, THEN IT ROLLED TO THE R APPROX THE SAME AMOUNT. THE RPTR SAID THAT NEITHER PLT LOOKED AT THE ATTITUDE INDICATOR AND BASED THEIR ESTIMATIONS ON THE ANGLE OF THE THRESHOLD AND RWY LIGHTS. HE SAID THAT BOTH PLTS CALLED FOR A GAR IN THE FLT STATION AT THE SAME TIME AND HE STARTED THE THRUST LEVERS FORWARD JUST AS THE CAPT WAS ADVANCING THEM AND HE ALSO FOLLOWED THE CAPT'S CTL INPUTS BY PLACING HIS HAND LIGHTLY ON THE CTL WHEEL. AS THE ACFT WAS ROTATED IT STRUCK THE RWY FIRMLY JUST AS THE THRUST WAS BECOMING EFFECTIVE. THE TWR CTLR RPTED THAT THE ACFT'S TAIL HAD STRUCK THE RWY, BUT NO EVIDENCE OF THIS WAS FOUND. THE CREW BELIEVES THAT THE CTLR SAW THE REFLECTION OF THE WINGTIP STROBE LIGHTS OFF OF THE RWY SURFACE. THE CREW AND THE CTLRS WERE SURPRISED BY THE WAKE AND ALL PARTIES AGREED, ACCORDINGTO THE RPTR, IN A POST INCIDENT DISCUSSION THAT THE SEPARATION WAS GREATER THAN THAT REQUIRED BY REGS.

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.