Embraer 145LR N825MJ

Summary

On 17 October 2001 at about 02:14 local time, a Embraer 145LR registered N825MJ, operated by Mesa Airlines, was involved in an accident near Roanoke, Virginia, United States. 33 people were on board and nobody was injured. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

17 October 2001 at 02:14

Classification

Accident

Location

Roanoke, Virginia, United States

Nearest airport

Roanoke Regional (ROA)

Coordinates

37.3109, -79.8998

Aircraft

Embraer 145LR

Registration

N825MJ

Category

Airplane

Engines

2

Operator

Mesa Airlines

Operating rule

Part 121: Air Carrier

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Pittsburgh → Roanoke

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Night/Dark

NTSB number

NYC02LA013

Nobody was injured.

the captain's failure to maintain airspeed which resulted in an inadvertent stall/mush, and hard landing. Factors were the failure of both pilots to follow company CRM and flight manual procedures, and the captains improper approach briefing.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record. This site does not paraphrase or interpret it.

Read the full NTSB narrative

The captain briefed a "no go-around" for a night visual approach to a "Special Airport." The approach was not stabilized, and the airspeed decreased to the point of a stall. The airplane struck the runway in a nose high pitch attitude, on the aft fuselage, and settled on the landing gear. The first officer made initial callouts of slow airspeed and then stopped when the captain failed to respond to her callouts. After landing, the airplane was taxied to the gate where a post flight inspection limited to the main landing gear did not find the damage. When interviewed, the captain reported that she briefed "no go-around" because no takeoffs were authorized on the runway at night or in IMC conditions; however, the first officer knew this was incorrect, but did not challenge the captain. Both pilots had received CRM training, which included crewmember assertiveness, methods of fostering crew input, and situational awareness, and training on special use airports; however it was not followed by either pilot. The captain's handling of the airplane was outside the parameters specified in the company manuals. Both pilots were described to having good flying skills. The captain said the first officer was passive and quiet. The first officer reported the captain was defensive and did not take criticism very well. A definition of stabilized approach criteria was not found in the company manuals. An FAA Advisory Circular dated August 10, 2000 defined stabilized approach criteria, and actions to be taken if the approach was not stabilized.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.