Narrative:

Flight operated normally until final approach. The winds were reported as 270 degrees at 31 KTS gusting to 44 KTS. Toronto approach told us to expect runway 24L. We reviewed the limitations for the crj aom and found the crosswind component to be within the 27 KT steady-state maximum; intercepted the localizer; and began a visual approach. The captain briefed that he would hold 150 KIAS during the approach to adjust for reported gains and losses of 10-15 KTS; and did so until short final. We crossed the threshold at 50 ft; on runway centerline; and decelerating through vref of 138 KTS. The captain retarded the thrust to idle; and began his flare. At about the 30 ft callout -- which the aircraft makes automatically -- we were struck by a significant crosswind which carried the aircraft off the centerline and toward the left side of the runway despite the captain's prompt application of crosswind correction. The captain later reported using full left rudder; and I observed aileron application sufficient to place us at risk of dragging the right wingtip upon landing. We decided to abandon the landing attempt; and initiated a go-around. The captain called 'set thrust; flaps 8 degrees' in accordance with the standard go-around procedure; and pushed the thrust levers up. I confirmed the thrust setting; waiting as the right engine delayed spool-up 2-3 seconds behind the left and the aircraft yawed considerably further to the right. When the thrust was set; I began by moving the flap lever to the 30 degree position. The aircraft began to sink almost immediately; and the stick shaker activated for approximately 2 seconds. We abandoned further configuration changes as the captain prevented ground contact and accelerated into a positive climb. I then completed flap retraction. In the confusion of the moment; I focused on the stick shaker and flap settings; and (although my memory of those seconds is cloudy) may have failed to make the standard 'positive rate' callout which would have prompted landing gear retraction. When flaps were at 8 degrees we then retracted the gear and completed the standard missed approach. We then accepted vectors from toronto ATC to a second visual approach; and our second approach and landing proceeded normally. Since the crj wing is low and; therefore; deep inside ground effect during landing; and since it has no leading edge devices to help establish a nose-high attitude during approach; the normal procedure for landing is to retard the thrust to idle at 50 ft AGL. This commits the pilot to a landing earlier than in other aircraft types. The manual states that 'in the event that such action (low energy balked landing) is required; pilots must understand that ground contact is likely. Any attempt to commence a climb before the engines have achieved go-around thrust may result in aerodynamic stall -- normal 'go-around procedures cannot be employed until such time as go-around thrust is achieved.' no hands-on training is provided by air carrier for such an eventuality. I believe that this information is insufficient for safe operation in such an emergency situation. A better approach would be to establish a policy that in the event of a balked landing in the low-energy state (below 50 ft; thrust at idle) should be handled using windshear or terrain avoidance procedures. The thrust should not be set to the normal go-around setting; but to maximum thrust. No configurations changes should be attempted until; at the earliest; a positive rate of climb is established. In addition; pilots should have the opportunity to practice this operation at least once during initial type training.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: With the engines at idle in the flare; the flight crew of a CRJ100 is forced to reject the landing due to gusty crosswinds which displaced the aircraft from the runway centerline. When the engine and aircraft acceleration response proved to be marginal; a stick shaker resulted. Reporter suggested the use of maximum thrust be made SOP for such situations.

Narrative: Flight operated normally until final approach. The winds were reported as 270 degrees at 31 KTS gusting to 44 KTS. Toronto Approach told us to expect Runway 24L. We reviewed the limitations for the CRJ AOM and found the crosswind component to be within the 27 KT steady-state maximum; intercepted the LOC; and began a visual approach. The Captain briefed that he would hold 150 KIAS during the approach to adjust for reported gains and losses of 10-15 KTS; and did so until short final. We crossed the threshold at 50 FT; on runway centerline; and decelerating through Vref of 138 KTS. The Captain retarded the thrust to idle; and began his flare. At about the 30 FT callout -- which the aircraft makes automatically -- we were struck by a significant crosswind which carried the aircraft off the centerline and toward the left side of the runway despite the Captain's prompt application of crosswind correction. The Captain later reported using full left rudder; and I observed aileron application sufficient to place us at risk of dragging the right wingtip upon landing. We decided to abandon the landing attempt; and initiated a go-around. The Captain called 'Set thrust; flaps 8 degrees' in accordance with the standard go-around procedure; and pushed the thrust levers up. I confirmed the thrust setting; waiting as the right engine delayed spool-up 2-3 seconds behind the left and the aircraft yawed considerably further to the right. When the thrust was set; I began by moving the flap lever to the 30 degree position. The aircraft began to sink almost immediately; and the stick shaker activated for approximately 2 seconds. We abandoned further configuration changes as the Captain prevented ground contact and accelerated into a positive climb. I then completed flap retraction. In the confusion of the moment; I focused on the stick shaker and flap settings; and (although my memory of those seconds is cloudy) may have failed to make the standard 'positive rate' callout which would have prompted landing gear retraction. When flaps were at 8 degrees we then retracted the gear and completed the standard missed approach. We then accepted vectors from Toronto ATC to a second visual approach; and our second approach and landing proceeded normally. Since the CRJ wing is low and; therefore; deep inside ground effect during landing; and since it has no leading edge devices to help establish a nose-high attitude during approach; the normal procedure for landing is to retard the thrust to idle at 50 FT AGL. This commits the pilot to a landing earlier than in other aircraft types. The Manual states that 'In the event that such action (low energy balked landing) is required; pilots must understand that ground contact is likely. Any attempt to commence a climb before the engines have achieved go-around thrust may result in aerodynamic stall -- normal 'go-around procedures cannot be employed until such time as go-around thrust is achieved.' No hands-on training is provided by air carrier for such an eventuality. I believe that this information is insufficient for safe operation in such an emergency situation. A better approach would be to establish a policy that in the event of a balked landing in the low-energy state (below 50 FT; thrust at idle) should be handled using windshear or terrain avoidance procedures. The thrust should not be set to the normal go-around setting; but to maximum thrust. No configurations changes should be attempted until; at the earliest; a positive rate of climb is established. In addition; pilots should have the opportunity to practice this operation at least once during initial type training.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.