Runway excursion with gear collapse: accident, evidence and release
At 21:47 local a Boeing 737-800 with 6 crew and 160 passengers lands at a European airport in rain and a 15-knot crosswind. The aircraft runs off the end of the runway into soft ground; the nose gear collapses and the right engine contacts the ground, with damage to both cowlings and the forward fuselage. The evacuation uses four slides, one of which fails to inflate. Two passengers receive minor injuries, are treated at the airport and released. The runway is closed for eight hours. The operator's maintenance manager wants to lift the aircraft onto a trailer during the night and move it to the hangar before the press arrive, and the lessor's representative asks for the cockpit voice recorder to be read out and a transcript sent to the insurer. The crew have been taken to the airport medical centre. No one has yet contacted the investigating authority, and the airport fire service is still on scene.
1. Is this an accident or an incident? Give the classification and the reasoning.
Read the worked answer
Accident, on the basis of the aircraft damage rather than the injuries. Annex 13 defines an accident as an occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft in which a person is fatally or seriously injured, or the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure that adversely affects its structural strength, performance or flight characteristics and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, or the aircraft is missing or completely inaccessible.
Two limbs are in play. The two passengers have minor injuries, treated at the airport and released, which does not meet the Annex 13 test for serious injury; that requires, broadly, hospitalisation for more than 48 hours, fractures, lacerations causing severe haemorrhage or nerve, muscle or tendon damage, injury to internal organs, second or third degree burns, or exposure to infectious substances. The nose gear collapse, the engine contact with the ground, the damaged cowlings and forward fuselage and the failed slide do meet the damage limb: this is substantial damage requiring major repair, so the occurrence is an accident whatever the injury list says.
The classification matters immediately. An accident triggers the full Annex 13 process: notification, appointment of an investigator-in-charge, the right of the States of Registry, Operator, Design and Manufacture to appoint accredited representatives, and protection of the evidence. A runway excursion with a gear collapse would in any event be reportable as a serious incident if the damage had been less. Nothing about the classification waits for the maintenance assessment.
2. Who notifies whom, and what is the operator's role in the notification?
Read the worked answer
The State of Occurrence runs the notification. Locally the airport and the emergency services notify the national accident investigation authority without delay; that authority then notifies the State of Registry, the State of the Operator, the State of Design and the State of Manufacture, and ICAO in the case of an accident to an aircraft above 2,250 kg. Under the EU framework, Reg. (EU) No 996/2010 places the same duty on the Member State where the accident occurs, and the investigating authority - not the operator - coordinates with EASA and the other States.
The operator has a parallel duty. It must notify its own national authority and the accident investigation body of the State of the Operator, activate its emergency response plan, account for all occupants and preserve the evidence. In the EU it must also make an occurrence report through the Reg. (EU) No 376/2014 system, but that report supplements the investigation; it neither replaces nor delays the Annex 13 notification.
What the operator must not do is treat notification as a public-relations exercise. The runway is closed, the passengers are in the terminal and the aircraft is in the grass. The commander and the operator's duty manager should make sure the local authority has the manifest, the fuel and cargo details, the number of occupants and any dangerous goods on board. That information serves the investigation and the emergency services; it is not a statement about cause. Passenger care and crew welfare are the operator's job while the investigators take control of the site.
3. The maintenance manager wants to move the aircraft overnight; the lessor wants the CVR transcript. How do you respond?
Read the worked answer
Both requests are refused, for the same reason: the aircraft and its recorders are evidence under the control of the investigating authority.
On the aircraft, Annex 13 requires the site and wreckage to be protected, and no one may move the aircraft or its contents except to rescue persons, to prevent further damage by fire or other hazard, or to preserve evidence, and then only in coordination with the investigator-in-charge. Lifting the aircraft onto a trailer before the press arrive is none of those things. The correct sequence is to secure the site, prevent fuel or fluid escape, protect the recorders and the failed slide, photograph the aircraft and the ground marks before anything is touched, and wait for the investigator's release. The maintenance manager should be told that the operator does not have authority to release its own aircraft after an accident; it returns to service when the investigation releases it, not when a hangar is free.
On the CVR, the recorder is in the custody of the investigating authority, and Annex 13 restricts the use and disclosure of recordings to the investigation. The operator must not read it out, copy it or pass a transcript to the lessor or insurer. The insurer's proper route is through the investigating authority and the operator's legal department. The same applies to the flight data recorder and any quick-access recorder data.
On preservation, do not pull circuit breakers, remove recorders or selectively power down on your own initiative. If a recorder is still powered and there is a risk of overwrite, that is a decision for the investigator, who should be asked immediately. Crew statements, ATC tapes, weather and the technical log are also evidence. The sole objective of the investigation is the prevention of accidents, not the apportionment of blame; any internal company investigation must be coordinated so that it neither contaminates the evidence nor pressures the crew, who are witnesses and need rest, representation and support before any interview.