Event Details


Title:Runway overrun Onur Air, Runway overrun after rejected take-off of the Onur Air MD-88, registration TC-ONP, at Groningen Airport Eelde on 17 June 2003
Micro summary:This MD-88 overran the runway on takeoff after experiencing a configuration warning.
Event Time:2003-06-17 at 0722 UTC
File Name:2003-06-17-NL.pdf
Publishing Agency:The Dutch Safety Board
Publishing Country:The Netherlands
Report number:2003071
Pages:97
Site of event:Groningen Airport Eelde
Departure:Groningen Airport Eelde, Groningen, Netherlands
Destination:Dalaman Airport, Dalaman, Turkey
Airplane Type(s):Boeing McDonnell Douglas MD-88
Flight Phase:Takeoff
Registration(s):TC-ONP
Operator(s):Onur Air
Type of flight:Revenue
Occupants:149
Fatalities:0
Serious Injuries:0
Minor/Non-Injured:149
Other Injuries:0
Executive Summary:The captain stated that after the aircraft was lined up on runway 23 the take-off was initiated. After the throttles were advanced, the stabilizer warning sounded. The throttles were retarded and the aircraft stopped. The captain stated that the aircraft had moved five to six meters before it stopped. Eyewitnesses reported that 50 to 150 meters were used before the take-off run was resumed. One eyewitness estimated the used distance as 90 meters, approximately twice the length of the aircraft. Flight data recorder (FDR) data revealed that the aircraft entered the runway and initiated the takeoff. After the aircraft stopped, the distance travelled was approximately 25 meters.

On the runway checks were performed. FDR data indicated a stabilizer position change from 6.8 to 7.2 degrees aircraft nose up (ANU). Thereafter the crew initiated a static engine spin-up. Again the stabilizer warning sounded. The crew released the brakes and started the take-off roll. From the CVR it is derived that during the entire take-off roll the warning sounded continuously.

When attempting to rotate the captain experienced a heavy elevator control force. The captain stated that he needed much more than normal back pressure on his control column to lift the nose. He felt ”it was impossible to make the take-off”, and as the nose did not rise he decided to reject the take-off. Post accident analysis revealed that the rejection was initiated at 128 knots.

Both pilots stated that during rejection brakes and reversed engine thrust had been applied, which is confirmed by the FDR readout. The aircraft overran the runway end with a speed of approximately 75 knots. During the deceleration in the soft soil, it hit the approach lighting system, including the concrete structures embedded in the ground. It came to a stop approximately 100 meters beyond the runway end. There was no fire. All occupants evacuated the aircraft safely. Some of them returned to the aircraft and re-entered it, to pick up their belongings. In addition, the pilots remained on board and only left the aircraft when instructed to do so by the fire brigade.

AUSES

Probable cause(s)
• The crew resumed the take off and continued whilst the take off configuration warning, as a result of the still incorrect stabilizer setting, reappeared.

• The actual center of gravity during take-off (TO-CG) was far more forward than assumed by the crew. As a consequence the horizontal stabilizer was not set at the required position for take-off.

• The far more forward TO-CG - contributed to an abnormal heavy elevator control force at rotation and made the pilot to reject the take-off beyond decision speed. This resulted in a runway overrun.

Contributing factors
• By design the aircraft configuration warning system does not protect against an incorrect TO- CG insert.

• The aircraft was not equipped with a weight and balance measuring system.

• Deviations of operational factors accumulated into an unfavorable aircraft performance condition during take-off.

• Cockpit crew showed significant deficits.



Learning Keywords:Operations - Center of Gravity/MAC
Operations - Crew Resource Management
Operations - Evacuation
Operations - Runway Overrun
Systems - Automation Design
Close match:Tail strike during take-off, Boeing 747-412 9V-SMT, flight SQ286, Auckland International Airport 12 March 2003
Tailstrike on takeoff, Serious incident occurring on November 29, 2002 at Dortmund Airport involving a Boeing 737-800
Uncommanded rotation, Incident involving aircraft LN-RPL at Gothenburg/Landvetter Airport, O county, Sweden, on 7 December 2003
Loading error, Airbus A340-642, G-VSHY
Uncommanded pitch-up, Airbus A320-214, G-OOAR
Tail strike on rotation, Boeing 777-200B, N784UA
Uncommanded pitch-up, Fokker F27-600 Friendship, G-CHNL
Loss of Pitch Control During Takeoff, Air Midwest Flight 5481, Raytheon (Beechcraft) 1900D, N233YV, Charlotte, North Carolina, January 8, 2003
Stall on takeoff, Bombardier CL-600-2B16 (CL-604), C-FTBZ , Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas, October 10, 2000
Uncontrolled Impact With Terrain, Fine Airlines Flight 101, Douglas DC-8-61, N27UA, Miami, Florida, August 7, 1997
Loss of control on takeoff, United Airlines Flight 2885, N8053U, McDonnell Douglas DC-8-54F, Detroit, Michigan, January 11, 1983
Weight and Balance complications, McDonnell Douglas MD-83, March 7, 2000
Tail strike on takeoff, Boeing 747-128, December 28, 2001
Tail strike on landing from FMS error, McDonnell Douglas MD-11, November 11, 1998
Runway overrun, Airbus A320, Detroit, March 17, 2001

 




Accident Reports on DVD, Copyright © 2006 by Flight Simulation Systems, LLC.  All Rights Reserved.
 All referenced trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
www.fss.aero