Airbus A300 Crash During Non Precision Approach

The US NTSB determined that the probable cause of this Airbus A300-600F accident was the flight crew's continuation of an unstabilized approach and their failure to monitor the aircraft's altitude during the approach, which led to an inadvertent descent below the minimum approach altitude and subsequently into terrain.

Airbus A380 Smoke In Lavatory

On 31 January 2011, an Airbus A380-800 on a scheduled passenger service from Hong Kong (ROC) to Singapore and nearing the end of the cruise at night was suddenly subject to a loud noise and signs of possible fire in one of the toilet compartments accompanied by a corresponding ECAM Smoke alert for the same compartment. A fire extinguisher was discharged into the apparent source area and the location carefully monitored but no further signs of combustion were evident and the flight to destination was completed.

Airbus A340 Turbulence and Overspeed

On 22 July 2011 an Airbus A340-300 on a scheduled passenger flight from Caracas (Venezuela) to Paris CDG (France) at FL350 in night IMC encountered moderate turbulence which led to an overspeed annunciation which was followed by the aircraft abruptly pitching up and a gain of over 3000 feet in less than a minute before it was returned to the previous cruise level. There were no injuries to any of the 284 occupants. It appears that the relief First Officer was not present in the flight deck during the event.

Airbus A380 Inflight Uncontained Engine Failure

This A380 suffered an uncontained engine failure on 4 November 2010 and made an emergency landing at Singapore Changi Airport. The failure was the first of its kind for the Airbus A380. On inspection it was found that a turbine disc in the aircraft's No.2 Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine (on the port side nearest the fuselage) had disintegrated. The aircraft had also suffered damage to the nacelle, wing, fuel system, landing gear, flight controls, the controls for engine No.1 and an undetected fire in the left inner wing fuel tank that eventually self-extinguished. The failure was determined to have been caused by the breaking of a stub oil pipe which had been manufactured improperly.

Airbus A340 Loss of Visual References

On 27 April 2008 an Airbus A340-300 on a scheduled passenger flight from London (UK) to Nairobi (Kenya) with the First Officer as PF had carried out a night auto ILS approach to Runway 06 with the A/T engaged and been cleared to “land at your own discretion” with visibility reported as 3000 metres and the W/V 050 at 5 kts. The crew stated that they became visual with the runway at a height of between 300 and 200 ft. and at the DH of 200 ft, both pilots had more than the minimum visual reference required and could see “all the approach lights and a good section of runway lights”. The autopilot was disconnected at 100 ft radio altitude and the PF began to flare the aircraft at between 75 and 50 ft radio altitude. The aircraft floated at around 20 ft for a few seconds before it entered an area of fog and the PF lost sight of the right side of the runway and the runway lights. The commander also lost sight of the right side of the runway.

Airbus A340 Ground Collision

On 21 August 2008, an Airbus A340-300 on a scheduled passenger flight from Teheran (Iran) to Frankfurt (Germany) collided with a stationary bus with only the driver on board whilst approaching the allocated parking gate in normal daylight visibility. The No 4 engine impacted the bus roof as shown in the photograph below reproduced from the official report. None of the occupants of either the aircraft or the bus were injured.

Airbus A340 Fuel Starvation On Two Engines

On 8 February 2005, a Virgin Atlantic Airways A340-600 was nearing the end of an overnight flight from Hong Kong to London Heathrow when “some 11 hours after takeoff, at about 0330 hrs with the aircraft in Dutch airspace and at Flight Level 380, the No 1 (number one) engine lost power and ran down. Initially the pilots suspected a leak had emptied the contents of the fuel tank feeding No 1 engine but a few minutes later, the No 4 engine started to lose power. At that point all the fuel crossfeed valves were manually opened and No 4 engine recovered to normal operation. The pilots then observed that the fuel tank feeding No 4 engine was also indicating empty and they realised that they had a fuel management problem. Fuel had not been transferring from the centre, trim and outer wing tanks to the inner wing tanks so the pilots attempted to transfer fuel manually. Although transfer was partially achieved, the expected indications of fuel transfer in progress were not displayed so the commander decided to divert to Amsterdam (Schiphol) Airport where the aircraft landed safely on three engines.”

Airbus A340 Attempted Take-off on Taxiway

A serious incident involved an Airbus A340-300 aircraft at Hong Kong International Airport at a time the Flight crew attempted to take-off after making a wrong turn onto a taxiway. On detecting the anomaly, an air traffic controller instructed the pilot to stop rolling and the attempted take-off was aborted in time. There was no other traffic on the taxiway and there was no injury to persons or damage to the aircraft.

Airbus A340 Intermediate Loss of Control During Turbulence

An A340-300 from Caracas (Venezuela) to Paris Charles de Gaulle (France), was enroute at FL350 about 145nm northeast of Point A Pitre (Guadeloupe) in night and instrument meteorological conditions when the Flight crew received an overspeed alert, the autopilot disconnected, the crew observed the indicated airspeeds had increased to 0.88 mach (MMO 0.86 mach) and 304 knots. The aircraft gradually increased its pitch attitude to 11 degrees and climbed with up to 5 000 feet/minute up to FL380, reaching FL380 at 0.66 mach/ 205 KIAS - stall speed was computed at 202 KIAS - before the pitch attitude decreased again and the aircraft returned to normal flight parameters. The flight was continued to Paris and landed safely in Paris about 7.5 hours after the upset.

Airbus A330 Multiple Bird Strikes On Climb

The aircraft was in the initial climb, passing 530 ft agl after takeoff, when it was struck by birds which impacted the fan blades of the left and right engines as well as the nose of the aircraft. Both engines were damaged and the left engine was shut down by the crew because the engine oil pressure indicated zero. The aircraft returned to the airport of departure and carried out an uneventful single-engine landing.

Airbus A330 Unreliable Thrust Setting to Emergency Landing

On 13 April 2010, a Rolls Royce Trent 700-powered Airbus A330-300 being operated by Hong Kong-based Operator Cathay Pacific on a scheduled passenger flight from Surabaya, Indonesia to Hong Kong experienced difficulties in controlling the thrust from both engines whilst en route and as the initial difficulties worsened, a PAN and then a MAYDAY was declared. A successful high speed landing was subsequently made in normal daylight visibility on runway 07L with asymmetric thrust settings which could not be altered resulting in minor damage to the aircraft and a landing gear fire which prompted an emergency evacuation in which 62 of the 322 occupants sustained minor injuries and one sustained serious injuries.

Airbus A330 Error in the takeoff performance calculations

Due to an error in the takeoff performance calculations, incorrect takeoff speeds were used on departure. On rotation, the aircraft initially failed to become airborne as expected, causing the commander to select TOGA power. The aircraft then became airborne and climbed away safely. Whilst the investigation could not identify the exact source of the error, deficiencies were revealed in the operator’s procedures for calculating performance using their computerised performance tool.

Airbus A330 TAM Blocked Pitots

The Airbus A330 which was flying from Miami, USA to Sao Paulo, Brazil, experienced a loss of primary speed and altitude information while in cruise flight. Initial reports indicated that the Flight crew noted an abrupt drop in indicated outside air temperature, followed by the loss of the Air Data Reference System and disconnections of the autopilot and auto-thrust, along with the loss of speed and altitude information. The Flight crew used backup instruments and primary data was restored in about five minutes. The flight landed at Sao Paulo with no further incident and there were no injuries and damage.

Airbus A330 Strong Turbulence

Strong turbulence in cruise, momentary loss of control of the flight path by the crew.

Airbus A330 Inflight Cockpit Fire

The fire, which started in a windscreen heating system, was observed by pilots while flying 230 Nm SW of Guam. The fire was extinguished by the crew and the aircraft diverted to Guam.

Airbus A330 NWA Blocked Pitots

The A330 was cruising at 39,000 feet on autopilot near Kagoshima, Japan, when it encountered intense rain and both the captain's and co-pilot's airspeed indicators immediately showed a huge rollback in the plane's forward velocity. With autopilot and automatic-throttle controls disengaged, the cockpit was filled with beeps and bright warning signals indicating various system problems. The Flight crew said the event lasted more than three minutes, but they maintained airspeed, manually flew the most direct route out of the storm and nobody was hurt.

Airbus A330 Inflight Aircraft Damaged

Inflight Aircraft Damaged after Engine Cowling Latches Not Locked

Airbus A330 CFIT on Landing

The aircraft crashed about 1,200 meters short of the landing runway, outside the airport perimeter. The aircraft was destroyed by the impact and post-crash fire. The final report stated that the accident resulted from the pilots’ lack of a common action plan during the approach, the final approach being continued below the Minimum Decision Altitude without ground visual reference being acquired, the inappropriate application of flight control inputs during the go-around and after the activation of the Terrain Awareness and Warning System, and the flight crew’s lack of monitoring and controlling of the flight path

Airbus A330 Damage to both engines, leading edges and radome

On 19 January 2013, an Airbus A330-300 on a passenger flight from Orlando (USA) to Manchester (UK) with an additional heavy crew member present on the flight deck for take offhit birds shortly after making a night take off from runway 35L in VMC and high engine vibration was followed by indications of a total loss of oil pressure from the left hand engine, which was shut down. A MAYDAY was declared and an uneventful return to land was completed.

Airbus A330 Emergency Descent

On 22 December 2010, an Airbus A330-300 inbound to Helsinki (Finland)and cruising in very cold air at an altitude of 11,600 metres lost cabin pressurisation in cruise flight and completed an emergency descent before continuing the originally intended flight at a lower level. The subsequent Investigation was carried out together with that into a similar occurrence to another company A330 which had occurred 11 days earlier. It was found that in both incidents, both engine bleed air systems had failed to function normally because of a design fault which had allowed water within their pressure transducers to freeze.

Airbus A330 Hard landing

Hard landing, inappropriate stopover maintenance procedure, take-off with a substantially damaged aeroplane

Airbus A320 – Smell due to hydraulic fluid leaking

An unusual smell was noticed soon after takeoff, the source of which could not be determined. The flight crew donned their oxygen masks and carried out the appropriate actions to deal with the situation, while arranging with ATC for a return to Heathrow. Subsequent investigation revealed that hydraulic fluid leaking from a hydraulic actuator had been ingested into the air conditioning system. Following appropriate maintenance action, the aircraft was returned to service and no recurrence has been reported.

Airbus A320 – Brake problem and runway overrun

While landing on a short runway the aircraft touched down just beyond the end of the marked touchdown zone with low autobrake selected. Manual wheel braking commenced shortly after mainwheel touchdown. At a groundspeed of around 70 kt the brakes ceased operating, for about 17 seconds. A pronounced dip in the runway surface initially prevented the pilots from seeing the runway end. When it became apparent to the Captain that it would not be possible to stop before the end of the runway, he deliberately did not select alternate braking, as this would have caused loss of nosewheel steering, but instead used nosewheel steering to turn the aircraft sharply to the right. The aircraft skidded sideways and came to a halt with its nosewheels off the runway, shortly before the end of the paved surface and the start of a steep down slope.

Airbus A319 Unstabilized VMC Approach

An Airbus A319 narrowly escaped disaster at the end of an unstabilized, hurried VMC approach.

Airbus A319 Serious Incident During Go-Around

Early in the ILS approach the auto-throttle disengaged with the thrust levers in the idle thrust position. The disengagement was neither commanded nor recognized by the crew and the thrust levers remained at idle throughout the approach. Because the aircraft was fully configured for landing, the air speed decayed rapidly to a value below that appropriate for the approach. The Captain took control and initiated a go-around during which the aircraft pitched up excessively; flight crew attempts to reduce the aircraft’s pitch were largely ineffective. The aircraft reached a maximum pitch of 44º nose-up and the indicated airspeed reduced to 82 kt. The flight crew, however, were able to recover control of the aircraft and complete a subsequent approach and landing at Bournemouth without further incident.

Airbus A319 Multiple Electrical Failure

While in the cruise, with the autopilot and autothrust systems engaged, a failure of the electrical system occurred which caused numerous aircraft systems to become degraded or inoperative. Some of the more significant effects were that the A319 could only be flown manually, all the aircraft’s radios became inoperative and the Captain’s electronic flight instrument displays blanked. Attempts by the flight crew to reconfigure the electrical system proved ineffective and the aircraft systems remained in a significantly degraded condition for the remainder of the flight, making operation of the aircraft considerably more difficult. The flight crew were unable to contact air traffic control for the rest of the flight. The aircraft landed uneventfully with the radios and several other systems still inoperative.

Airbus A300 Crash During Non Precision Approach

The US NTSB determined that the probable cause of this Airbus A300-600F accident was the flight crew's continuation of an unstabilized approach and their failure to monitor the aircraft's altitude during the approach, which led to an inadvertent descent below the minimum approach altitude and subsequently into terrain.

Airbus A310 Runway Overrun and Fire

On 25 March 2008 an Airbus A310 being operated by Sudan Airways on a passenger flight from Port Sudan to Khartoum overran the runway after a late night touchdown at destination in normal visibility off a non precision approach to runway 36. A fire became evident once the aircraft had stopped and this subsequently burned out of control and destroyed the aircraft. 30 of the 214 occupants died because of the fire and related smoke but no record of the extent of injuries to the survivors was available to the Investigation.

Airbus A340 Runway Overrun and Fire

During the flare, the aircraft travelled through an area of heavy rain, and visual contact with the runway environment was significantly reduced. There were numerous lightning strikes occurring, particularly at the far end of the runway. The aircraft touched down about 3800 feet down the runway, reverse thrust was selected about 12.8 seconds after landing, and full reverse was selected 16.4 seconds after touchdown. The aircraft was not able to stop on the 9000-foot runway and departed the far end at a groundspeed of about 80 knots. The aircraft stopped in a ravine and caught fire.

Airbus A340 Engine Power Loss In Flight

One hour and nine minutes into the flight, while cruising at flight level 350, the pilots felt an airframe vibration and observed the number 1 engine shut down spontaneously.

Airbus A340 Aircraft Damaged In Crosswind Landing

in strong gusting crosswind conditions, the aircraft began to drift to the right of the runway extended centreline. At the moment of touchdown, the aircraft was drifting to the right, its heading was some 10º to the left of its track and its roll attitude was approximately 3.5º right wing low. These factors resulted in the tyres of the two outer wheels of the right main landing gear making firm contact with the right edge line of the designated runway surface.

Airbus A330 Tailstrike On takeoff

As the aircraft was taking off the underside of the tail struck the runway. The strike was undetected by the flight crew, but they were notified of the strike during the climb-out by ATC.

Airbus A330 Maintenance Error and In Flight Fuel Leak

An A330-300 departed Vancouver, Canada, on a scheduled flight to Calgary, Canada. Shortly after take-off, the Vancouver tower informed the pilots that a substantial amount of smoke or vapour was coming from the number 2 engine. Although the pilots did not receive any abnormal engine indications or cockpit warnings, they declared an emergency and advised that they were returning to Vancouver.

Airbus A330 Landing With Both Engines Shut Down

An Airbus 330 aircraft, was on a scheduled flight from Toronto (Canada) to Lisbon (Portugal) when the crew noted a fuel imbalance. Shortly after, the crew initiated a diversion from the flight-planned route for a landing at the Lajes Airport, Terceira Island in the Azores.

Airbus A330 Emergency Descent

The aircraft made an emergency descent from FL350 and the Captain requested a diversion to Shannon.

Airbus A321 Roll Oscillations On Landing

At approximately 140 feet AGL, on final approach to Runway 24R with full flaps selected, the aircraft experienced roll oscillations. The flight crew levelled the wings and the aircraft touched down firmly. During the approach, the aircraft had accumulated mixed ice on areas of the wing and the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer that are not protected by antiice systems.

Airbus A320 Hard Landing

The aircraft landed heavily, causing substantial damage to the aircraft’s main landing gear. It touched down with a high rate of descent, following a late initiation of the flare by the co-pilot, who was undergoing line training.

Airbus A321 Nosewheel Axle Failure

While taxiing to the gate, the flight crew heard a noise from the nose landing gear area. As the aircraft turned onto the lead-in line at the gate, the ground marshallers observed that the right-hand nosewheel was missing

Airbus A320 Visual Approach On The Wrong Airport

The crew judged that they were too high to carry out a safe landing from the ILS approach and requested permission from ATC to carry out a visual approach. The aircraft then flew a right descending orbit and a visual circuit, from which it landed. Upon landing, the crew were advised by ATC that they had, in fact, landed at the wrong airport.

Airbus A320 Total Electrical Failure During Climb

As the aircraft climbed to FL 200 with autopilot and autothrust engaged, there was a major electrical failure. This resulted in the loss or degradation of a number of important aircraft systems. The crew reported that both the captain's and co-pilot's PFDs and NDs went blank, as did the upper ECAM display. The autopilot and autothrust systems disconnected, the VHF radio and intercom were inoperative and most of the cockpit lighting went off. There were several other more minor concurrent failures

Airbus A320 Tailstrike On Landing

The crew were carrying out a manually flown ILS approach without the use of flight directors or autothrust. At 530 ft agl the aircraft was well above the normal 3º glideslope. The glideslope was not regained until shortly before landing, and by then the speed was below approach speed (VAPP) and the descent rate was high. During the flare, full back sidestick was applied and the aircraft bounced after touching down in a high pitch attitude; the second touchdown was also in a high pitch attitude. Post flight inspection confirmed that the aircraft tail had struck the ground on landing.

Airbus A320 Near CFIT

On a flight from Alexandria, Egypt to Addis Abeba, Ethiopia, the crew carried out two approaches using the Addis Abeba VOR and associated DME. On the second approach the aircraft crossed over a ridge of high ground in IMC and came within 56 ft of terrain at a location 5 nm to the northeast of the airport. As the aircraft crossed the ridge the crew, alerted a few seconds earlier by a radio altimeter height callout, carried out a go-around; at the same time the EGPWS generated a « TOO LOW TERRAIN » aural alert. The investigation determined that the antenna of the ADS VOR had suffered water ingress and was not functioning correctly. The correct maintenance procedures for the ADS VOR/DME and its associated monitoring equipment were not followed. The aircraft received erroneous information from the ADS VOR which was fed to the flight deck VOR display, the FMS, the navigation displays and the EGPWS computer with its associated Terrain Awareness Display (TAD).

Airbus A320 Collision with a Tug

After receiving taxi clearance from Air Traffic Control, the A320 started moving under its own power. Shortly afterwards it collided with the tractor that had just performed the pushback, damaging the right engine and the tractor.

Airbus A320 CFIT During Go Around

During a go-around in bad weather conditions, The Airbus A320 stalled in turn. The aircraft was completely destroyed due to impact with the water.

Airbus A319 Inadvertent Selection Of Parking Brake On Landing

On approach the captain inadvertently selected the parking brake to ON after the first officer had called for full flap. The application of the parking brake was not detected prior to touchdown. All four main landing gear tyres deflated on landing.

Airbus A310 Runway Overrun and Crash

The A310 ran down the runway, overran the runway threshold and collided with barriers, broke apart and burst into flames.

Airbus A310 Loss Of Rudder In Flight

During the landing flare, the rudder control inputs were not effective in correcting for a slight crab. The aircraft landed and taxied to the gate. After shutdown, it was discovered that the aircraft rudder was missing. Small pieces of the rudder were still attached to the vertical stabilizer.

Airbus A310 Altitude Bust

Serious altitude bust during approach due to an incorrect QNH setting

Airbus A300 Tailstrike On takeoff

During takeoff, as the aircraft was accelerating at 40 knots, it pitched up and its tail touched the ground violently. The crew abandoned the takeoff and returned to the parking area.

Airbus A340 Tailstrike On Takeoff

Within seconds of becoming airborne, the flight crew were informed by ATC that the aircraft had scraped its tail on takeoff. The commander acknowledged the report and the aircraft continued with the standard instrument departure but unpressurized and not above 6,000 feet altitude.

Airbus A340 Emergency Landing

An A340 Crew Conducts Emergency Landing With Left-main Gear Partially Extended

Airbus A340 Flight Crew Conducts Emergency Landing With Left main Gear Partially Extended

The report said that a wheel-brake torque rod detached and prevented the left-main gear from extending fully. The aircraft was substantially damaged during the emergency landing at London Heathrow Airport. Seven occupants received minor injuries during evacuation.

Airbus A320 Runway Overrun

On touchdwon, after a normal ILS approach, the normal braking and alternate braking system failed. The captain elected to turn the aircraft through some 90° to the right where the aircraft ran into a low earth embankment. The nose gear collapsed while the engines made contact with the embankment, bringing the aircraft to a stop.

Airbus A321 Damaged Windscreens in Thunderstorm

The aircraft was in the cruise at FL340 when it encountered an area of severe turbulence and hail. Some of the flight deck windows became crazed and other areas of the airframe suffered extensive damage although this was not apparent to the crew.

Airbus A320 Gear Collapsed After Hard Landing

The aeroplane did not respond to the pilots' commands on the controls to pitch up the aircraft and to reduce the vertical speed on the flare, causing the aircraft to impact against the threshold of the runway in a slight nose-down attitude. Upon impact, the nose landing gear collapsed, but the aircraft remained within the runway and stopped after 1,100 meters of landing run with all four main gear tires burst. An emergency evacuation was carried out. A passenger was a seriously injured and several other occupants received some bruises and injuries produced during the evacuation of the aircraft. The internal structural damages of the airframe were beyond economically viable repair and the aircraft was written off.

Airbus A320 CFIT After Non-adherence to SOPs

The report said that spatial disorientation likely was involved in the flight crew’s controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) during an attempted go-around. The ground-proximity warning system generated nine warnings before the aircraft struck the sea.

Airbus A310 Improper Response to Stall Warning

The pilot flying applied forward pressure on the control column but did not increase power when the stall-warning system activated during takeoff. The airplane descended into water soon thereafter. The controlled-flight-into-terrain (CFIT) accident occurred on a dark night with limited external visual references available for the flight crew.

Airbus A300 In Flight Separation of Vertical Stabilizer

This report explains the accident involving American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus Industrie A300-605R, N14053, which crashed into a residential area of Belle Harbor, New York, USA following the in-flight separation of the airplane’s vertical stabilizer and rudder. The safety issues discussed in this report focus on characteristics of the A300-600 rudder control system design, A300-600 rudder pedal inputs at high airspeeds, aircraft-pilot coupling, flight operations at or below an airplane’s design maneuvering speed, and upset recovery training programs.

Airbus A319 Toxic Fumes

On 19 December 2010 the Airbus A319 coming from Vienna, Austria, was on approach to Köln/Bonn Airport, Germany. Turning on to the base leg the two pilots noticed an abnormal smell. A short time later during intercept of the extended centre line, both pilots noticed an adverse effect on their physical and cognitive performance. They donned their oxygen masks and declared emergency. The PIC remained able to steer the airplane. The co-pilot felt he could no longer perform his tasks in the cockpit without restrictions. After the landing and having reached the parking position, both pilots sought medical treatment. Whereas the PIC could resume his duties after four days, the co-pilot remained unfit to fly until 10 July 2011. The technical inspection of the aircraft did not reveal any indication of a technical malfunction.

Airbus A330 Smoke Warning

Early in the flight the A330 crew received a series of smoke warnings from the aft cargo hold and the Captain elected to return to London Gatwick (UK). The crew carried out the appropriate emergency drills, including the discharge of the fire extinguishers in the aft cargo hold, but the smoke warnings continued. The aircraft landed safely, the crew brought it to a halt on the runway and endeavored to establish the extent of any fire. This produced conflicting evidence and, with smoke warnings continuing, the Captain ordered an emergency evacuation. The passengers all left the aircraft within 90 seconds but two injuries, classed as ‘Serious’, were incurred. Subsequent examination of the aircraft and its systems showed that the smoke warnings had been spurious.

Airbus A310 Crash After Takeoff

The aircraft was completely destroyed on impact with the sea.

Airbus A330 Aerodynamic Stall and Crash

On June 1st, 2009 flight AF447 from Rio to Paris crashed into the Atlantic Ocean, killing all 228 persons on board. The safety and legal investigations concluded that human factors have played an important role in the accident.

Airbus A330 Data entry and navigational issues

On 10 March 2015 an Airbus A330 was conducting a regular passenger service from Sydney (Australia) to Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia). On departure from runway 16R the aircraft was observed by ATC to enter the departure flight path of the parallel runway 16L. The flight crew identified a problem with the onboard navigation systems. Attempts to troubleshoot and rectify the problem resulted in further degradation of the navigation system, as well as to the aircraft’s flight guidance and flight control systems. The flight crew elected to discontinue the flight but were unable to return to Sydney as the weather had deteriorated in the Sydney area and the available systems limited the flight to approaches in visual conditions. The aircraft was instead radar vectored to Melbourne, and the flight completed in visual conditions.

Airbus A330 Mayday Following Control Problems On Both Engines

The flight crew of an Airbus A330 declared “MAYDAY” when approaching Hong Kong International Airport (VHHH) with control problem on both engines. The aircraft landed at a groundspeed of 231 knots, with No. 1 engine stuck at about 70 % N1 and No. 2 stuck at about 17 % N1. Five main tyres were deflated after the aircraft came to a complete stop on Runway 07L of VHHH. After being advised by the rescue leader that there was fire and smoke on the wheels, the Commander initiated an emergency evacuation of passengers. A total of 57 passengers and six cabin crew were injured during the evacuation.

Airbus A330 Inflight Upset

On 7 October 2008, an Airbus A330 aircraft, departed Singapore on a scheduled passenger transport service to Perth, Australia. While the aircraft was cruising at 37,000 ft, the autopilot disconnected with various aircraft system failure indications. While the crew was evaluating the situation, the aircraft abruptly pitched about 8.4 degrees nose-down, and descended 650 ft during the event. After returning the aircraft to 37,000 ft, the flight crew commenced actions to deal with multiple failure messages before the aircraft commenced a second uncommanded pitch-down event of about 3.5 degrees nose-down. As there were several serious injuries, the flight crew declared a MAYDAY and landed 20 minutes later.

Airbus A340 Aircraft Damage After Loss of Visual Reference After Landing

During the final stages of landing at Nairobi (Kenya) the flight crew lost visual references, during which time the pilot flying made a left rudder pedal input. A go‑around was initiated. However, the aircraft touched down and the left main landing gear ran off the paved runway for a distance of 180 m. No significant damage occurred.

Airbus A350 Cognitive incapacitation during go-around with flight path deviations

Predictive windshear warning on final, cognitive incapacitation of copilot during go-around, lateral and vertical flight path deviations, low energy alert, conflict with a departing aircraft.

Airbus A350 Tailstrike on landing

The aircraft was approaching Runway 27L at London Heathrow airport at the end of a flight from Dubai. During the flare for landing the aircraft “floated” and the crew believed it would not land within the runway Touchdown Zone (TDZ). A go-around was initiated from low height and speed; the subsequent pitch rate applied caused the aircraft to reach a nose-up attitude sufficient to cause a tailstrike.

Airbus A350 Unstabilized approach and loss of situational awareness

After a shortened final approach, the Airbus A350 was flying at night in good visual meteorological conditions unstabilized on instrument approach to runway 07R of Frankfurt/Main Airport. The glide slope of the instrument landing system was flown through from above. Starting at 3,300 ft AMSL, the flight path was continuously below the glisdesope. The flight crew aborted the approach and initiated a go-around far below the glide slope. The investigation determined errors in the programming of the waypoints in the flight management system, errors in the handling of the auto flight system for the approach, reduced situational awareness of the pilots in regard to the spatial position and communications / cooperation deficiencies within the flight crew.

Airbus A320 Go-around and crash

On 22 May 2020 the Pakistan International Airlines aircraft Airbus A320 took off from Lahore (Pakistan) to perform a regular commercial passenger flight to Karachi (Pakistan). The aircraft performed an ILS approach for runway 25L and touched down without landing gears. Both engines scrubbed the runway at high speed. Flight crew initiated a go-around and informed ATC that they intend to make a second approach. About 4 minutes later, during downwind leg, flight crew declared an emergency and stated that both engines had failed. The aircraft started losing altitude. It crashed in a populated area, short of runway 25L by about 1340 meters. An immediate subsequent post impact fire initiated. Out of 99 souls on-board, 97 were fatally injured and 2 passengers survived.

Airbus A380 Near CFIT

On 10 September 2017, an Airbus A380 on a scheduled international passenger flight from Dubai to Moscow Domodedovo failed to establish on the ILS LLZ for runway 14R in day VMC before continuing descent below its cleared altitude. When the ATC noticed this, they instructed it to stop descent but when the initiation of a go around was delayed, an EGPWS ‘PULL UP’ Warning followed during which a minimum of 395 feet agl was reached. A second approach was discontinued from a safe altitude and a third was subsequently completed successfully.