Summit Air Avro RJ-100 at Prince Rupert on October 8, 2024 – Runway Overrun

On October 8, 2024, a Summit Air Avro RJ-100, registration C-FRJY, operating flight SUT-8292 from Nanaimo, BC, to Prince Rupert, BC, overran the runway at Prince Rupert Airport during landing. The aircraft, with 38 people on board, slid off the runway’s end, damaging a runway end light, but stopped safely about 30 meters beyond the runway. Passengers disembarked without injury, and the aircraft taxied to the apron under its own power. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) classified the investigation as a Class 4 incident, highlighting the importance of timely and accurate runway surface condition (RSC) reports, especially during operations outside normal airport hours.

Sequence of Events

The aircraft conducted a straight-in approach using the area navigation global navigation satellite system (RNAV/GNSS) for Runway 31. It touched down at 07:49 local time, approximately 1600 feet from the runway threshold, at a ground speed of 112 knots. Upon touchdown, the wing spoilers deployed automatically, and the crew applied the brakes. However, they reported no noticeable deceleration from the braking system.

The flight crew attempted to switch between the aircraft’s two independent hydraulic systems to restore braking functionality but observed no improvement. As the aircraft approached the end of the runway with minimal deceleration, the crew activated the emergency brake system. Additionally, they shut down engines No. 1 and No. 4 to reduce residual thrust. Despite these measures, the aircraft continued sliding, and as it neared the end of the runway, it began to drift sideways. The aircraft collided with two runway end lights before coming to rest about 30 meters beyond the runway.

Technical and Safety Considerations

The primary technical issue in this incident was the failure of both hydraulic braking systems. The use of independent hydraulic systems is a standard design feature in many aircraft to provide redundancy, ensuring braking ability even in the event of one system’s failure. However, in this case, neither system effectively slowed the aircraft.

The failure to achieve effective braking prompted the use of the emergency braking system, which is typically powered by an auxiliary hydraulic source or a separate mechanical system designed to provide braking capability in emergencies. In addition to this, the crew’s decision to shut down two of the engines helped to reduce the overall thrust, further mitigating the situation.

The crew’s actions were aligned with established procedures, including the deployment of emergency brakes and reduction of thrust. Despite these efforts, the aircraft’s lack of braking performance, compounded by the runway’s condition, led to the aircraft’s overrun.

Weather and Runway Conditions

One of the critical factors in this incident may have been the condition of the runway. The TSB’s final report emphasized that runway surface conditions (RSC) can change rapidly, particularly during hours when the airport is not fully staffed, such as the early morning or late night. The most recent RSC report available to the crew may not have accurately reflected the actual conditions at the time of landing. This could have led to an underestimation of the runway’s braking effectiveness, potentially contributing to the aircraft’s inability to decelerate as expected.

Aircraft landings, particularly in regions subject to varying weather conditions, often rely heavily on up-to-date RSC reports to guide decision-making. The absence of timely information can present significant challenges to flight crews, especially when surface friction is reduced due to factors like moisture, snow, or ice.

Flight Crew’s Actions

The flight crew’s actions in managing the control issues were commendable. Upon realizing the brake systems were not responding as expected, they promptly switched between the two hydraulic systems. When these systems failed to produce effective braking, they engaged the emergency braking system and initiated a shutdown of two engines to reduce thrust. Furthermore, the captain attempted to steer the aircraft using the nose wheel tiller to maintain directional control, though this was not enough to prevent the aircraft from sliding sideways.

The flight crew’s decision-making, communication, and execution of emergency procedures contributed to the safe outcome, preventing a more severe accident. The passengers were safely disembarked, and no injuries were reported.

Maintenance and Investigation

The aircraft remained grounded following the incident for an investigation into the braking system failure. Maintenance crews likely examined the hydraulic systems, braking mechanisms, and emergency braking components to determine the root cause of the failure. Hydraulic systems, while highly reliable, can suffer from issues such as fluid leaks, pressure loss, or component malfunctions that can severely impair braking performance.

Lessons Learned

This incident highlights several important considerations for aviation safety:

1. Timely and Accurate Runway Surface Condition Reports: The TSB emphasized the importance of up-to-date RSC reports, particularly when operations occur outside of normal airport hours. Flight crews must have access to the most accurate runway condition information to make informed decisions during landing.

2. Redundancy in Hydraulic Systems: While redundancy in hydraulic systems is designed to ensure operational continuity, this incident demonstrates that even dual hydraulic systems can fail. Ongoing maintenance, regular inspections, and post-flight checks of hydraulic systems are critical to identifying potential faults before they result in system-wide failures.

3. Effective Use of Emergency Procedures: The crew’s prompt engagement of emergency procedures, including the activation of the emergency braking system and shutdown of engines, played a significant role in mitigating the incident. This underscores the importance of comprehensive training and adherence to established protocols during in-flight emergencies.

4. Importance of Ground Crew Coordination: While the flight crew followed proper procedures, the role of ground crews in inspecting and maintaining the aircraft’s braking and hydraulic systems before departure cannot be overstated. Proper communication between ground and flight crews is essential for identifying and addressing potential technical issues before takeoff.

Conclusion

The Summit Air Avro RJ-100 incident on October 8, 2024, underscores the challenges faced during landings when technical malfunctions coincide with suboptimal runway conditions. The successful outcome of this incident is a testament to the crew’s professionalism and training, but it also serves as a reminder of the critical importance of system redundancy, accurate runway information, and proactive maintenance in ensuring flight safety. The investigation into the braking system failure will likely lead to further improvements in aircraft design and operational protocols, helping to prevent similar occurrences in the future.