37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 911260 |
Time | |
Date | 201009 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | A319 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Landing |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Main Gear Tire |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical |
Narrative:
The touchdown was normal and initial deceleration was also normal. We felt a significant bump at approximately 50 KTS but did not realize a tire had failed. We had landed on a wet runway using normal brakes. During the end of the roll out we also received an ECAM indication of number one brake system fault; and an indication the alternate brakes had come on.ground control cleared us to taxi to the gate. We taxied to the gate with no adverse steering or braking problems. While enroute to the gate we heard ground talking to emergency vehicles on the ramp identifying our aircraft as the aircraft in question; but at no time did ground tell our flight there was suspected tire damage. As we turned into the gate area we were able to get a word into ground control to ask if they had called for the vehicles to respond to our aircraft. Ground control said they did call the vehicles. When we asked why; the controller said it looked like we might have had tire damage on the right side. The vehicles did not closely approach the aircraft and deplaning was normal. I directed the flight attendants not to use the rear stairs for deplaning; and accomplished a normal shutdown.we had called for maintenance taxing in; and they met the aircraft. They discovered the number 3 tire had indeed failed and deflated due to a severe flat wear spot. I made two entries in the log book: one entry for the failed tire and a second for the brake system ECAM indication. On the previous flight on the same aircraft we had a worn flat spot requiring a tire change on the same wheel. The landing occurred under generally the same conditions with a wet runway. On that landing; as I took control of the aircraft and braking at approximately 50 KIAS prior to slowing enough for the turn off on the taxiway; I noticed what felt like an anti-skid release or brake cycle; but had no ECAM or abnormal brake indications in the cockpit. A ramp agent noticed the worn spot through several layers of tread while installing the chocks.I made an entry in the log book and called maintenance who changed the tire. Although we had no abnormal antiskid or brake indications on the flight deck; I asked maintenance if it would be appropriate to accomplish an anti-skid check or test on that wheel. Maintenance said the maintenance manual did not call for such a check. Therefore; after the tire change no additional maintenance was accomplished.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: An A319 flight crew suffered nearly identical tire damage on the same wheel on two consecutive landings. The second event caused the tire to fail.
Narrative: The touchdown was normal and initial deceleration was also normal. We felt a significant bump at approximately 50 KTS but did not realize a tire had failed. We had landed on a wet runway using normal brakes. During the end of the roll out we also received an ECAM indication of number one brake system fault; and an indication the alternate brakes had come on.Ground Control cleared us to taxi to the gate. We taxied to the gate with no adverse steering or braking problems. While enroute to the gate we heard Ground talking to emergency vehicles on the ramp identifying our aircraft as the aircraft in question; but at no time did Ground tell our flight there was suspected tire damage. As we turned into the gate area we were able to get a word into Ground Control to ask if they had called for the vehicles to respond to our aircraft. Ground Control said they did call the vehicles. When we asked why; the Controller said it looked like we might have had tire damage on the right side. The vehicles did not closely approach the aircraft and deplaning was normal. I directed the Flight Attendants not to use the rear stairs for deplaning; and accomplished a normal shutdown.We had called for Maintenance taxing in; and they met the aircraft. They discovered the number 3 tire had indeed failed and deflated due to a severe flat wear spot. I made two entries in the log book: one entry for the failed tire and a second for the brake system ECAM indication. On the previous flight on the same aircraft we had a worn flat spot requiring a tire change on the same wheel. The landing occurred under generally the same conditions with a wet runway. On that landing; as I took control of the aircraft and braking at approximately 50 KIAS prior to slowing enough for the turn off on the taxiway; I noticed what felt like an anti-skid release or brake cycle; but had no ECAM or abnormal brake indications in the cockpit. A ramp agent noticed the worn spot through several layers of tread while installing the chocks.I made an entry in the log book and called Maintenance who changed the tire. Although we had no abnormal antiskid or brake indications on the flight deck; I asked Maintenance if it would be appropriate to accomplish an anti-skid check or test on that wheel. Maintenance said the Maintenance Manual did not call for such a check. Therefore; after the tire change no additional maintenance was accomplished.
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.