Flight Details
Aircraft Type: ATR 72-212A Operator: Aurigny Air Services Registration: G-PEMB Flight Number: GR607 Route: London Gatwick Airport (LGW), England to Guernsey Airport (GCI), Channel Islands, UK Date of Incident: 15 April 2025 Total Occupants: Not officially disclosed; typical ATR 72 seating up to 72 passengers Weather Conditions: Gusting winds up to 42 knots; overcast with broken cloud below 1,000 feet; temperature 8°C
Introduction
On 15 April 2025, an Aurigny Air Services ATR 72-212A sustained a tail strike during landing on runway 27 at Guernsey Airport amid strong and gusting surface winds. The aircraft completed the landing roll without further incident and taxied to the apron under its own power. No injuries were reported among passengers or crew. However, post-flight inspection revealed substantial damage to the lower rear fuselage consistent with a tail strike. The aircraft has remained grounded in Guernsey for over 53 hours as investigations and structural inspections continue. The occurrence has been classified as a landing accident involving structural damage under adverse meteorological conditions.
Sequence of Events
Flight GR607 departed London Gatwick for a scheduled regional service to Guernsey and conducted a standard descent into the Channel Islands airspace. During final approach to runway 27, wind conditions deteriorated, with surface gusts recorded at up to 42 knots from 250 degrees.
The approach was flown in visual meteorological conditions with low broken cloud and sufficient visibility. Despite the gusting crosswind component, the approach proceeded without a missed approach or diversion.
Touchdown occurred at 16:11 local time (15:11Z), with the aircraft making ground contact near the runway threshold. However, during the flare and landing transition, the tail of the aircraft made contact with the runway surface—a classic tail strike scenario. The aircraft remained controllable, decelerated safely, and completed the rollout on the runway centreline.
The crew taxied the aircraft to the apron without declaring an emergency, and passengers disembarked normally. The tail strike was discovered during post-flight inspection.
Crew & Communication
The crew did not report an emergency during the approach or landing and did not request priority handling or inspection upon landing. It is currently unknown whether the crew were aware of the tail contact at the time of touchdown.
Communications with air traffic control remained normal throughout, and there were no abnormal indications during the taxi phase. The METAR data confirms the presence of gusting crosswinds exceeding 40 knots, with direction fluctuating within 90 degrees of runway heading—conditions that require elevated pilot workload and increased vulnerability to pitch excursions during flare.
The flight crew’s handling during the gust-affected approach will form a key part of the ongoing investigation, including descent rate at touchdown, pitch attitude, and approach stabilisation criteria adherence.
Aircraft Systems & Technical Analysis
The ATR 72’s empennage is designed with ground clearance tolerances that assume a specific landing pitch envelope. Exceeding pitch limits during landing—particularly in strong headwinds or downdraft conditions—can result in a tail strike, damaging the fuselage’s lower rear skin and internal structure.
Initial reports confirm that G-PEMB sustained damage consistent with a tail contact. The extent of the damage has not been made public, but the aircraft has remained grounded since the incident, suggesting significant structural assessment and potential component replacement is required.
Damage typically includes:
Skin deformation or breach along the lower aft fuselage Scrape marks or abrasion consistent with runway surface contact Damage to tail skid assembly or structural ribs in the rear pressure bulkhead
It remains unclear whether the aircraft was fitted with a tail strike sensor or energy-absorbing skid pad. The ATR 72 is not equipped with a tail camera or direct crew alert for such impact unless monitored visually or via post-flight inspection.
Passenger Experience & Cabin Conditions
Passengers onboard did not report any major incident during landing. The aircraft remained upright and rolled out normally without bouncing or directional deviation. Any vertical jolt from the tail contact would likely have felt similar to a firm landing, but not necessarily alarming.
Cabin crew reported normal post-landing procedures and disembarkation occurred via standard means at the terminal gate. No injuries were recorded.
Passengers were informed of the tail strike only after the airline released a statement regarding the structural inspection and flight cancellation.
Emergency Response & Aftermath
No emergency response was initiated at the time of landing. Ground handlers at Guernsey identified signs of a potential tail contact during external walkaround, prompting engineering teams to conduct a focused damage assessment.
The aircraft was removed from active service and towed to a remote stand for detailed inspection. It has remained on the ground at Guernsey for over 53 hours, with structural engineers assessing damage and coordinating with ATR and Aurigny technical departments for repair approval.
Subsequent flights involving the aircraft were cancelled or reassigned. No runway closure was required, and Guernsey Airport operations continued as normal.
Investigation Status
The UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has been notified and may elect to open a formal investigation given the presence of substantial airframe damage and strong weather involvement. Aurigny is conducting its own internal review.
Flight data will be downloaded from the aircraft’s flight data recorder (FDR) and quick access recorder (QAR) to reconstruct:
Descent rate and flare profile Touchdown point and pitch attitude Wind shear or gust effects in the flare phase Airspeed and sink rate during roundout
Crew statements and cockpit voice recordings (CVR) will provide insight into approach strategy, CRM, and awareness of the strike event.
Root Cause & Contributing Factors
The primary cause of the tail strike is consistent with pitch exceedance during flare under gusty wind conditions. Likely contributing factors include:
Excessive nose-up pitch due to wind shear or downdraft during flare Reduced sink rate perception leading to over-rotation Crosswind correction inputs or delayed flare onset Lack of automated alert for tail contact or pitch exceedance
Weather conditions at the time were at or near the operating limit for the ATR 72’s demonstrated crosswind and gust envelope. The crew’s situational awareness and adaptation to rapidly changing wind vectors will be closely examined.
Safety Recommendations & Industry Impact
Although the aircraft remained fully controllable and no injuries occurred, this incident highlights:
The risk of tail strikes during manual landings in gusty conditions, particularly in high-wing turboprops with longer rear fuselage overhang The need for recurrent simulator training that includes tail strike scenarios, especially under gust and crosswind exposure Potential review of approach briefings and use of flight director guidance during visual flare in turbulent low-level air
If systemic or training deficiencies are identified, Aurigny or the AAIB may recommend updates to SOPs, approach stabilisation callouts, or crew handling techniques under marginal wind conditions.
Conclusion
The Aurigny ATR 72 tail strike on landing at Guernsey underscores the hazards posed by gusty wind landings, especially in high-wing, rear-heavy regional aircraft. Despite the challenging conditions, the aircraft landed safely and remained controllable, but sustained substantial damage that has removed it from service pending inspection and repair.
The crew’s handling of the situation post-landing was calm and effective, ensuring the safety of all onboard. The ongoing investigation will aim to determine whether the strike was due to environmental forces, pitch management, or approach dynamics, with the goal of preventing recurrence.
Disclaimer
This article is based on publicly available information and reports at the time of writing. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, we cannot guarantee the completeness of the information provided.
If you are the rightful owner of any referenced content or images and wish them to be removed, please contact takedown@cockpitking.com.
