Narrative:

On visual approach the first officer was the flying pilot and commented that we seemed a bit high. I stated 'we are high' and the first officer adjusted the descent rate to around 900 FPM. The approach did not exceed the stabilized approach criteria. Just prior to touchdown; I looked at the vsi and it showed 700 FPM. There was no flare before touchdown; making the landing a bit firm. I was concerned about a hard landing and we discussed the definition of one at the gate. I called maintenance for what they considered a hard landing and at our landing weight; just shy of 40;000 pounds; anything over 600 FPM would be a hard landing. Since I thought we touched down at 700 FPM or just short of that; I requested a hard landing inspection. Dispatch asked if any passengers were injured or commented on the landing; and I told them no as I was standing in the doorway; as I always do; saying 'thank you' and 'good day' to the passengers. The airplane was removed from service. I found out later in the day that the touch down had occurred around 560 FPM; making the landing firm; but not 'hard'.as the pilot not flying; I should have been more aware of the approach. When flying with a probationary pilot; I need to realize that their skills of handling the plane may not be as seasoned as mine and when someone says 'we are high'; I should not hesitate to ask if they would like to 'go-around'; regardless if I think the approach is fine. Had the approach exceeded the stabilized limits or the landing not taken place in the touchdown zone; I would have called for a 'go-around'. I requested the hard landing inspection out of caution and the fact that I was not exactly sure if we had exceeded the limits for a hard landing or not.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ200 Captain describes a very firm landing performed by a new First Officer and writes it up as a hard landing. Maintenance reports that the vertical speed at touch down was just shy of the hard landing definition.

Narrative: On visual approach the First Officer was the flying pilot and commented that we seemed a bit high. I stated 'we are high' and the First Officer adjusted the descent rate to around 900 FPM. The approach did not exceed the stabilized approach criteria. Just prior to touchdown; I looked at the VSI and it showed 700 FPM. There was no flare before touchdown; making the landing a bit firm. I was concerned about a hard landing and we discussed the definition of one at the gate. I called Maintenance for what they considered a hard landing and at our landing weight; just shy of 40;000 LBS; anything over 600 FPM would be a hard landing. Since I thought we touched down at 700 FPM or just short of that; I requested a hard landing inspection. Dispatch asked if any passengers were injured or commented on the landing; and I told them no as I was standing in the doorway; as I always do; saying 'thank you' and 'good day' to the passengers. The airplane was removed from service. I found out later in the day that the touch down had occurred around 560 FPM; making the landing firm; but not 'hard'.As the pilot not flying; I should have been more aware of the approach. When flying with a probationary pilot; I need to realize that their skills of handling the plane may not be as seasoned as mine and when someone says 'we are high'; I should not hesitate to ask if they would like to 'go-around'; regardless if I think the approach is fine. Had the approach exceeded the stabilized limits or the landing not taken place in the touchdown zone; I would have called for a 'go-around'. I requested the hard landing inspection out of caution and the fact that I was not exactly sure if we had exceeded the limits for a hard landing or not.

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.