If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user

 Actions

Special

Semantic search

  • B738, Mangalore India, 2012 (Synopsis: On 14 August 2012, a Boeing 737-800 crew continued a previously stable ILS Cat 1 approach below the prescribed MDA without having acquired the prescribed visual reference. The aircraft was then damaged by a high rate of descent at the initial touchdown in the undershoot in fog. The occurrence was not reported by either the crew or the attending licensed engineer who discovered consequent damage to the aircraft. Dense fog had prevented ATC visual awareness. The Investigation attributed the undershoot to violation of minima and to both pilots looking out for visual reference leaving the flight instruments unmonitored.)
  • B738, Manila Philippines, 2018 (Synopsis: On 16 August 2018, a Boeing 737-800 made a stabilised approach to Manila during a thunderstorm with intermittent heavy rain but the crew lost adequate visual reference as they arrived over the runway. After a drift sideways across the 60 metre-wide landing runway, a veer off occurred and was immediately followed by a damaging collision with obstructions not compliant with prevailing airport safety standards. The Investigation found that the Captain had ignored go around calls from the First Officer and determined that the corresponding aircraft operator procedures were inadequate as well as faulting significant omissions in the Captain’s approach brief.)
  • B738, Mildura VIC Australia, 2013 (Synopsis: On 18 June 2013, a Boeing 737-800 crew en route to Adelaide encountered un-forecast below-minima weather conditions on arrival there and decided to divert to their designated alternate, Mildura, approximately 220nm away where both the weather report and forecast were much better. However, on arrival there, an un-forecast rapid deterioration to thick fog had occurred with insufficient fuel to go anywhere else. The only available approach was flown, but despite exceeding the minimum altitude by 260 feet, no visual reference was obtained. A further approach with the reported overcast 100 feet agl and visibility 200 metres was continued to a landing.)
  • B738, Mumbai India, 2018 (Synopsis: On 10 July 2018, a Boeing 737-800 marginally overran the wet landing runway at Mumbai after the no 1 engine thrust reverser failed to deploy when full reverse was selected after a late touchdown following a stabilised ILS approach. The Investigation found that the overrun was the result of touchdown with almost 40% of the runway behind the aircraft followed by the failure of normal thrust reverser deployment when attempted due to a failed actuator in one of the reversers. The prevailing moderate rain and the likelihood that dynamic aquaplaning had occurred were identified as contributory.)
  • B738, Naha Japan, 2007 (Synopsis: On 20 August 2007, as a Boeing 737-800 being operated by China Airlines on a scheduled passenger flight arrived on the designated nose-in parking stand at destination Naha, Japan in daylight and normal visibility, fuel began to leak from the right wing near to the engine pod and ignited. An evacuation was quickly initiated and all 165 occupants including 8 crew members were able to leave the aircraft before it was engulfed by the fire, which spread rapidly and led to the destruction of the aircraft and major damage to the apron surface. As the stand was not adjacent to the terminal and not served by an air bridge, there was no damage to structures. All occupants had left the aircraft before the Airport RFFS arrived at the scene.)
  • B738, Newcastle UK, 2010 (Synopsis: On 25 November 2010, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Thompson Airways on a passenger fight from Arrecife, Lanzarote to Newcastle UK marginally overran Runway 07 at destination onto the paved stopway during a night landing in normal ground visibility. None of the 197 occupants were injured and the aircraft was undamaged. Passengers were disembarked to buses for transport to the terminal. An acceptable disposition of frozen deposits had been advised as present on the runway prior to the approach after a sweeping operation had been conducted following a discontinued approach ten minutes earlier because of advice from ATC that the runway was contaminated with wet snow.)
  • B738, Nuremburg Germany, 2010 (Synopsis: On 8 January 2010, an Air Berlin Boeing 737-800 attempted to commence a rolling take off at Nuremburg on a runway pre-advised as having only ‘medium’ braking action. Whilst attempting to position the aircraft on the runway centreline, directional control was lost and the aircraft exited the paved surface onto soft ground at low speed before the flight crew were able to stop it. The event was attributed to the inappropriately high taxi speed onto the runway and subsequent attempt to conduct a rolling take off. Relevant Company standard operating procedures were found to be deficient.)
  • B738, Oslo Gardermoen Norway, 2005 (Synopsis: On a 23 October, 2005 a Boeing 737-800 operated by Pegasus Airlines, during night time, commenced a take-off roll on a parallel taxiway at Oslo Airport Gardermoen. The aircraft was observed by ATC and stop instruction was issued resulting in moderate speed rejected take-off (RTO).)
  • B738, Pardubice Czech Republic, 2013 (Synopsis: On 25 August 2013, the type-experienced crew of a Boeing 737-800 operating with one thrust reverser locked out made a late touchdown with a significant but allowable tail wind component present and overran the end of the runway at Pardubice onto grass at 51 knots. No damage was caused to the aircraft and no emergency evacuation was performed. The Investigation concluded that the aircraft had been configured so that even for a touchdown within the TDZ, there would have been insufficient landing distance available. The flight crew were found not to have followed a number of applicable operating procedures.)
  • B738, Paris CDG France, 2008 (Synopsis: On 16 August 2008, an AMC Airlines’ Boeing 737-800 inadvertently began a night take off from an intersection on runway 27L at Paris CDG which left insufficient take off distance available before the end of the temporarily restricted runway length. It collided with and damaged obstructions related to construction works in progress on the closed section of the runway but sustained only minor damage and completed the intended flight to Luxor. The context for the flight crew error was identified as inadequate support from the Operator and inadequate airport risk assessment for operations with a reduced runway length.)
  • B738, Perth Australia, 2008 (Synopsis: On 9 May 2008, a Boeing 737-800 made a low go around at Perth in good daylight visibility after not approaching with regard to the temporarily displaced runway threshold. A second approach was similarly flown and, having observed a likely landing on the closed runway section, ATC instructed a go around. However, instead, the aircraft flew level at a low height over the closed runway section before eventually touching down just beyond the displaced threshold. The Investigation found that runway closure markings required in Australia were contrary to ICAO Recommendations and not conducive to easy recognition when on final approach.)
  • B738, Perth Western Australia, 2010 (Synopsis: On 24 February 2010, a Garuda Boeing 737-800 misunderstood the runway exit instruction issued during their landing roll at Perth and turned onto an intersecting active runway. An expeditious exit from this runway followed and no actual conflict resulted. The phraseology used by air traffic control was open to incorrect interpretation by the flight crew and led to their premature turn off the landing runway despite a prior briefing on exit options.)
  • B738, Prestwick UK, 2009 (Synopsis: On 23 December 2009, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Irish airline Ryanair on a scheduled passenger flight from Dublin to Prestwick left the end of the destination runway in normal daylight visibility and the landing gear sunk into the adjacent wet grass after an attempt to brake on the icy surface prior to turning onto the designated exit taxiway was unsuccessful. The occupants left the aircraft via the forward airstairs onto the grass and then moved across to the paved surface of the taxiway and runway.)
  • B738, Rome Ciampino Italy, 2008 (Synopsis: On 10 November 2008, a Boeing 737-800 about to land at Rome Ciampino Airport flew through a large and dense flock of starlings, which appeared from below the aircraft. After the crew had made an unsuccessful attempt to go around, they lost control due to malfunction of both engines when full thrust was applied and a very hard impact half way along the runway caused substantial damage to the aircraft. The Investigation concluded that the Captain’s decision to attempt a go around after the encounter was inappropriate and that bird risk management measures at the airport had been inadequate.)
  • B738, Rostov-on-Don Russia, 2016 (Synopsis: On 19 March 2016, a Boeing 737-800 making a second night ILS approach to Rostov-on-Don failed to complete a go around commenced after becoming unstable in turbulent conditions and crashed at high speed within the airport perimeter killing all 62 people on board. The Investigation concluded that the Captain had lost spatial awareness and then failed to configure the aircraft correctly or control its flightpath as intended and that although the First Officer had recognised this, he had tried to coach the Captain rather than take over. It was noted that the flight up to this point had been conducted normally.)
  • B738, Rotterdam Netherlands, 2003 (Synopsis: On 12 January 2003, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Dutch airline Transavia on a passenger charter flight initially going from Rotterdam to Maastrict-Aachen was obliged to reject its take off on Runway 24 at Rotterdam after it pitched nose-up just after take-off thrust had been selected. The pitch up movement only stopped when the aft fuselage and the tailskid assembly contacted the runway and only when the flight crew rejected the take-off did the aircraft nose gear regain ground contact. The aircraft was damaged and unfit for flight but able to taxi back to the terminal to allow the uninjured passengers to disembark.)
  • B738, Singapore, 2015 (Synopsis: On 6 December 2015, a Boeing 737-800 was being manoeuvred by tug from its departure gate at Singapore to the position where it was permitted to commence taxiing under its own power when the tug lost control of the aircraft, the tow bar broke and the two collided. The Investigation attributed the collision to the way the tug was used and concluded that the thrust during and following engine start was not a contributory factor. Some inconsistency was found between procedures for push back of loaded in-service aircraft promulgated by the airline, its ground handling contractor and the airport operator.)
  • B738, Sint Maarten Eastern Caribbean, 2017 (Synopsis: On 7 March 2017, a Boeing 737-800 crew making a daylight non-precision approach at Sint Maarten continued it without having established the required visual reference to continue beyond the missed approach point and then only realised that they had visually ‘identified’ a building as the runway when visibility ahead suddenly improved. At this point the approach ground track was corrected but the premature descent which had inadvertently been allowed to occur was not noticed and only after the second of two EGPWS Alerts was a go-around initiated at 40 feet above the sea.)
  • B738, Sochi Russia, 2018 (Synopsis: On 1 September 2018, a Boeing 737-800, making its second night approach to Sochi beneath a large convective storm with low level windshear reported, floated almost halfway along the wet runway before overrunning it by approximately 400 metres and breaching the perimeter fence before stopping. A small fire did not prevent all occupants from safely evacuating. The Investigation attributed the accident to crew disregard of a number of windshear warnings and a subsequent encounter with horizontal windshear resulting in a late touchdown and noted that the first approach had meant that the crew had been poorly prepared for the second.)
  • B738, Stuttgart Germany, 2005 (Synopsis: On 23 April 2005, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Turkish charter airline Sky Air on a passenger flight from Stuttgart to Dusseldorf tipped onto its tail when take off thrust was applied for the intended departure from Runway 25 in normal day visibility. The attempt to take off was immediately abandoned and the aircraft towed back to the gate for the 100 passengers to disembark. One of the cabin crew was slightly injured and the aircraft was ‘severely damaged’.)
  • B738, Surat India, 2014 (Synopsis: On 6 November 2014, a Boeing 737-800 taking off at night from Surat hit an object as it was approaching 80 knots and the take-off was immediately rejected. On return to the gate substantial damage was found to the left engine and a runway inspection found one dead buffalo and another live one. The runway was reopened after removal of the carcass but the live buffalo was not removed and was seen again by the runway the following day. The Investigation found a history of inadequate perimeter fencing and inadequate runway inspection practices at the airport.)
  • B738, Sydney Australia, 2007 (Synopsis: On 14 July 2007, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by New Zealand airline Polynesian Blue on a scheduled passenger service from Sydney to Christchurch New Zealand commenced take off on Runway 16R with asymmetric thrust set and veered off the side of the runway reaching the intersecting runway 07 before rejected take off action initiated by the flight crew took effect and the aircraft came to a stop.)
  • B738, en-route, Arabian Sea, 2010 (Synopsis: On 26 May 2010, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Air India Express on a passenger flight from Dubai UAE to Pune, India was in the cruise at night at FL370 near PARAR when a sudden high speed descent occurred without ATC clearance during which nearly 7000 feet of altitude was lost in a little over 30 seconds before recovery was made. The remainder of the flight was uneventful. Despite the abnormal pitch, pitch change and ‘g’ variation, none of the 113 occupants had been injured.)
  • B738, en-route, Colorado Springs CO USA, 2006 (Synopsis: B738 diversion into KCOS following in-flight fire. The fire started after a passenger's air purifier device caught fire whilst in use during the flight. The user received minor burns and the aircraft cabin sustained minor damage.)
  • B738, en-route, east of Asahikawa Japan, 2010 (Synopsis: On 26 October 2010, an All Nippon Boeing 737-800 was radar vectored towards mountainous terrain and simultaneously given descent clearance to an altitude which was 5000 feet below the applicable MVA whilst in IMC without full flight crew awareness. Two TAWS ‘PULL UP’ hard warnings occurred in quick succession as a result. The flight crew responses were as prescribed and the subsequent investigation found that the closest recorded proximity to terrain had been 655 feet. It was established that the controller had ‘forgotten’ about MVA.)
  • B738, en-route, near Lugano Switzerland, 2012 (Synopsis: On 4 April 2012, the cabin pressurisation controller (CPC) on a Boeing 737-800 failed during the climb passing FL305 and automatic transfer to the alternate CPC was followed by a loss of cabin pressure control and rapid depressurisation because it had been inadvertently installed with the shipping plug fitted. An emergency descent and diversion followed. The subsequent Investigation attributed the failure to remove the shipping plug to procedural human error and the poor visibility of the installed plug. It was also found that "the pressurisation system ground test after CPC installation was not suitable to detect the error".)
  • B738, en-route, near Sydney Australia 2018 (Synopsis: On 12 July 2018, a Boeing 737-800 was climbing through FL135 soon after takeoff from Sydney with First Officer line training in progress when the cabin altitude warning horn sounded because both air conditioning packs had not been switched on. The Captain took control and descended the aircraft to FL100 until the situation had been normalised and the intended flight was completed. The Investigation noted that although both pilots were experienced in command on other aircraft types, both had limited time on the 737 and concluded that incorrect system configuration was consequent on procedures and checklists not being managed appropriately.)
  • B738, en-route, near Toyama Japan, 2018 (Synopsis: On 8 July 2018, a Boeing 737-800 discontinued three consecutive approaches at its intended destination Toyama because, despite unexceptional weather conditions, it was in each case, impossible to achieve or continue a stabilised approach within the operator’s applicable criteria. Diversion to the designated alternate was then commenced with just sufficient fuel to reach it without using final reserve fuel. However, en-route the crew became concerned at their fuel status and ATC initially had difficulty receiving their emergency communications resulting in a MAYDAY declaration. An expedited routing then followed with a landing which just avoided the use of final reserve fuel.)
  • B738, en-route, northeast of Lanzarote Canaries Spain, 2018 (Synopsis: On 10 February 2018, soon after a Boeing 737-800 en-route to Fuerteventura had begun its cleared descent from FL370 to FL130, the controller changed the clearance limit to FL360 after noticing a previously overlooked potential loss of separation with traffic below at FL350. The attempt to level off as instructed resulted in a mismanaged manual intervention which led to an upset lasting about a minute during which a passenger carrying a small child fell and sustained serious injury. The significant delay in getting the injured passenger to hospital after landing led to systemic deficiencies in airport medical assistance being identified.)
  • B738, en-route, south east of Marseilles France, 2011 (Synopsis: On 6 July 2011 the First Officer of a Ryanair Boeing 737-800 was suddenly incapacitated during a passenger flight from Pisa to Las Palmas. The Captain declared a ‘medical emergency’ and identified the First Officer as the affected person before diverting uneventfully to Girona. The subsequent investigation focused particularly on the way the event was perceived as a specifically medical emergency rather than also being an operational emergency as well as on the operator procedures for the situation encountered.)
  • B738, en-route, south south west of Brisbane Australia, 2013 (Synopsis: On 25 February 2013, a Boeing 737-800 about to commence descent from FL390 began to climb. By the time the crew recognised the cause and began to correct the deviation - their unintended selection of a inappropriate mode - the cleared level had been exceeded by 900 feet. During the recovery, a deviation from track occurred because the crew believed the autopilot had been re-engaged when it had not. The Investigation noted the failure to detect either error until flight path deviation occurred and attributed this to non-compliance with various operator procedures related to checking and confirmation of crew actions.)
  • B738, en-route, south west of Beirut Lebanon, 2010 (Synopsis: On 25 January 2010, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Ethiopian Airlines on a scheduled passenger flight from Beirut to Addis Ababa in night IMC disappeared from ATC radar soon after departure from Runway 21 and was subsequently found to have impacted the sea in an unintentional out of control condition some five miles south west of the airport less than five minutes after getting airborne Impact resulted in the destruction of the aircraft and the death of all 90 occupants.)
  • B738, en-route, southern Austria, 2010 (Synopsis: On 9 May 2010, Boeing 737-800 being operated by Swedish operator Viking Airlines on a public transport charter flight from Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt to Manchester UK and which had earlier suffered a malfunction which affected the level of redundancy in the aircraft pressurisation system, experienced a failure of the single air conditioning pack in use when over southern Austria and an emergency descent and en route diversion to Vienna were made. There were no injuries to any of the 196 occupants.)
  • B738, en-route, west of Canberra Australia, 2017 (Synopsis: On 13 March 2017, the crew of a Boeing 737-800 responded to an increase in indicated airspeed towards Vmo after changing the FMS mode during a high speed descent in a way that more abruptly disconnected the autopilot than they were anticipating which resulted in significant injuries to two of the cabin crew. The Investigation found that the operator’s customary crew response to an overspeed risk at the airline concerned was undocumented in either airline or aircraft manufacturer procedures and had not been considered when an autopilot modification had been designed and implemented.)
  • B738, vicinity Amsterdam Netherlands, 2009 (Synopsis: On 25 February 2009, the crew of a Turkish Airlines Boeing 737-800 lost control of their aircraft on final approach at Amsterdam after they had failed to notice that insufficient thrust was being used to keep the aircraft on the coupled ILS glideslope. An attempt to recover from the resultant stall was not successful and the aircraft crashed. The Investigation concluded that a go around should have been flown from 1000 feet as the approach was already unstable and that the attempt at recovery after the stall warning was not in accordance with the applicable procedure or crew training.)
  • B738, vicinity Christchurch New Zealand, 2011 (Synopsis: On 29 October 2011, a Boeing 737-800 on approach to Christchurch during the 68 year-old aircraft commander's annual route check as 'Pilot Flying' continued significantly below the applicable ILS minima without any intervention by the other pilots present before the approach lights became visible and an uneventful touchdown occurred. The Investigation concluded that the commander had compromised the safety of the flight but found no evidence to suggest that age was a factor in his performance. A Safety Recommendation was made to the Regulator concerning the importance of effective management of pilot check flights.)
  • B738, vicinity Chuuk Micronesia, 2018 (Synopsis: On 28 September 2018, a Boeing 737-800 was flown into the sea short of the intended landing runway at Chuuk during a non-precision approach which was continued below MDA without having obtained the required visual reference. The Investigation found that the Captain’s approach had become unstable soon after autopilot disconnection and an excessive rate of descent had taken the aircraft below the indicated glideslope and below MDA despite multiple EGPWS ‘Sink Rate’ aural Alerts and a visual-only ‘PULL UP’ Warning with impact following 22 seconds after passing MDA. The absence of an aural ‘PULL UP’ Warning was considered significant.)
  • B738, vicinity Cork Ireland, 2006 (Synopsis: On 4 June 2006, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Ryanair on a passenger flight from London Stansted to Cork became too high to land off a day visual approach and requested a right hand orbit to reposition. This positioning was flown too close to terrain with TAWS alert triggered prior to a second approach to a successful landing.)
  • B738, vicinity Denpasar Bali Indonesia, 2013 (Synopsis: On 13 April 2013, a Lion Air Boeing 737-800 flew a day non precision approach to runway 09 at Bali (Denpasar) and continued when the required visual reference was lost below MDA. Despite continued absence of visual reference, the approach was continued until the EGPWS annunciation 'TWENTY', when the aircraft commander called a go around. Almost immediately, the aircraft hit the sea surface to the right of the undershoot area and broke up. All 108 occupants were rescued with only four sustaining serious injury. The Investigation attributed the accident entirely to the actions and inactions of the two pilots.)
  • B738, vicinity Douala Cameroon, 2007 (Synopsis: On 5 May 2007, a Kenya Airways Boeing 737-800 departing Douala at night crashed shortly after take-off following an unsuccessful attempt at recovery after late recognition of a progressive right roll which led to spiral dive. The Investigation was unable to positively establish the reason for the unintended roll, but noted that it ad not been possible to determine whether the pilots, and in particular the aircraft commander, had been aware of the fact that the AP was not engaged.)
  • B738, vicinity Eindhoven Netherlands, 2013 (Synopsis: On 31 May 2013, a Boeing 737-800 (EI-ENL) being operated by Ryanair on a scheduled international passenger flight from Palma del Mallorca to Eindhoven as FR3531 was established on the ILS LOC in day IMC with the AP and A/T engaged and APP mode selected but above the GS, when the aircraft suddenly pitched up and stick shaker activation occurred. After a sudden loss of airspeed, the crew recovered control manually and the subsequent approach was completed without further event.)
  • B738, vicinity Faro Portugal, 2011 (Synopsis: On 24 October 2011, the crew of a Ryanair Boeing 737-800 operating the first flight after an unexpectedly severe overnight storm found that after take off, an extremely large amount of rudder trim was required to fly ahead. Following an uneventful return to land, previously undetected damage to the rudder assembly was found which was attributed to the effects of the storm. It was found that pre flight checks required at the time could not have detected the damage and noted that the wind speeds which occurred were much higher than those anticipated by the applicable certification requirements.)
  • B738, vicinity Kittilä, Finland 2012 (Synopsis: On 26 December 2012, a Boeing 737-800 experienced an uncommanded pitch up in IMC when intercepting the ILS GS at Kittilä. Initial crew response could not prevent a rapid transition to a very high nose up attitude and stick shaker activation occurred. Recovery from this upset was eventually achieved. The Investigation found that frozen de icing fluid had prevented three of the four input cranks for both elevator PCUs from functioning normally. It also concluded that, notwithstanding new de-icing procedures introduced by Boeing since the occurrence, the current aircraft type certification for all 737 variants may be unsound.)
  • B738, vicinity London Stansted UK, 2011 (Synopsis: On 13 March 2011, a Turkish Airlines’ Boeing 737-800 stopped climb shortly after take off after misreading the SID chart. After levelling at 450 feet agl, it continued following the lateral part of the SID only until ATC re-iterated the requirement to climb after resolving a temporary loss of contact due to an un-instructed premature frequency change. It was found that the crew had received but apparently not responded to an EGPWS ‘PULL UP’ Warning. It was concluded that there was an opportunity to improve the clarity of UK SID charts to aid pilots with limited English language skills.)
  • B738, vicinity Memmingen Germany, 2012 (Synopsis: On 23 September 2012 a Ryanair Boeing 737-800 made a premature descent to 450 feet agl in day VMC whilst turning right onto visual finals for runway 24 at Memmingen after the FMS selected altitude had been set to a figure only 44 feet above runway threshold elevation of 2052 feet amsl. EGPWS Alerts of ‘Sink Rate’ and ‘Caution Terrain’ prompted initiation of a go around which, as it was initiated, was accompanied by a an EGPWS ‘TERRAIN PULL UP’ warning. The go around and a second successful approach to runway 24 were uneventful. The Investigation is not yet complete.)
  • B738, vicinity Porto Portugal, 2015 (Synopsis: On 5 September 2015, a Boeing 737-800 was about to commence descent on a non-precision final approach at Porto in VMC when a green laser was directed at the aircraft. The Pilot Flying responded rapidly by shielding his eyes and was unaffected but the other pilot looked up, sustained flash blindness and "crew coordination was compromised". Subsequently, the approach became unstable and a go around to an uneventful approach to the reciprocal runway direction was completed. The subsequent Investigation noted the use of increasingly powerful green lasers in this way and that such use was not contrary to Portuguese law.)
  • B738, vicinity Skavsta Sweden, 2004 (Synopsis: On 2 July 2004, a Boeing 737-800 being operated by Irish operator Ryanair on a scheduled passenger flight from London Stansted to Skavsta Sweden, completed an extremely high speed and unstable approach in day VMC to destination during which relevant Operator SOPs were comprehensively ignored, EGPWS warnings were not actioned and AFM limits for trailing edge flap deployment were breached. Despite this, a landing at excessive speed was accommodated by just within the full length of the 2878 metre long dry runway.)
  • B738, vicinity Trivandrum India, 2015 (Synopsis: On 18 August 2015, a Boeing 737-800 made three unsuccessful ILS approaches at Cochin around dawn then diverted to Trivandrum where a day VOR approach was unsuccessful and a MAYDAY was declared due low fuel. Two further supposedly visual approaches were attempted there before a third such "visual" approach - which involved ignoring EGPWS PULL UP Warnings in IMC - was followed by a successful landing with 349kg fuel remaining. The Investigation found that aircraft safety had been jeopardised and that Cochin ATC had not communicated information on the deteriorating weather at Trivandrum. Relevant operator procedures were considered as inadequate.)
  • B738/A319 en-route, south east of Zurich Switzerland, 2013 (Synopsis: On 12 April 2013, a Ryanair Boeing 737-800 took a climb clearance intended for another Ryanair aircraft on the same frequency. The aircraft for which the clearance was intended did not respond and the controller did not notice that the clearance readback had come from a different aircraft. Once the wrong aircraft began to climb, from FL360 to FL380, a TCAS RA to descend occurred due to traffic just transferred to a different frequency and at FL370. That traffic received a TCAS RA to climb. STCA was activated at the ATS Unit controlling both Ryanair aircraft.)
  • B738/A321, Prague Czech Republic, 2010 (Synopsis: On 18 June 2010 a Sun Express Boeing 737-800 taxiing for a full length daylight departure from runway 06 at Prague was in collision with an Airbus 321 which was waiting on a link taxiway leading to an intermediate take off position on the same runway. The aircraft sustained damage to their right winglet and left horizontal stabiliser respectively and both needed subsequent repair before being released to service.)