Flight Details
Aircraft Type: Airbus A321-271N (A321neo) Operator: Frontier Airlines Registration: N607FR Flight Number: F93506 Route: Orlando International Airport (MCO), Florida to Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport (SJU), San Juan, Puerto Rico Date of Incident: 15 April 2025 (local time) Total Occupants: 228 (passengers and crew) Weather Conditions: Visual meteorological conditions, light winds, good visibility; METARs confirm calm evening weather
Introduction
On 15 April 2025, a Frontier Airlines Airbus A321neo performing flight F93506 from Orlando to San Juan experienced a violent hard landing on runway 10, resulting in a go-around, engine abnormality, gear concerns, and a diverted landing. During the initial touchdown at 21:40 local time, the aircraft made forceful contact with the runway, causing suspected damage to the landing gear. Moments after the go-around was initiated, the left Pratt & Whitney PW1133G engine emitted a continuous flame trail for several seconds, alarming passengers and prompting emergency response activation.
The crew placed the aircraft in a holding pattern while conducting landing gear system checks and later performed a low approach to runway 08. A safe landing was achieved approximately 40 minutes after the hard touchdown, with the aircraft vacating the runway to a parallel taxiway. Runway 10 was temporarily closed for inspection due to suspected debris and potential surface damage. The aircraft remains grounded in San Juan pending detailed engineering inspection.
Sequence of Events
Flight F93506 approached San Juan under stable meteorological conditions with winds from the east-southeast at light intensity and unrestricted visibility. The approach to runway 10 was standard until the final descent and flare phase, during which the aircraft impacted the runway with abnormal vertical velocity.
The force of the touchdown was severe enough that:
The crew initiated an immediate go-around, indicating possible bounce or inability to maintain directional control Passengers and ground observers reported a visible shock impact The left engine began emitting a continuous streak of flames for several seconds during the climb-out
Despite the engine behaviour, the aircraft maintained controlled flight. The crew engaged in situational assessment, reporting issues with the landing gear, and requested holding to run the relevant QRH checklists.
Approximately 27 minutes after the initial incident, the aircraft conducted a low approach to runway 08, likely to confirm landing gear alignment or down-and-locked status via visual inspection from tower or ground units. Satisfied with the configuration, the crew proceeded to execute a full landing on runway 08.
Landing occurred without further incident. The aircraft vacated the runway to a parallel taxiway where it came to a complete stop for a post-landing inspection.
Crew & Communication
The flight crew demonstrated measured and logical decision-making during a high-stress sequence of failures. The decision to go around following the hard touchdown prevented a potentially more hazardous situation had the gear failed structurally during rollout.
After the engine flame was reported, no shutdown occurred in-flight, suggesting parameters remained within controllable margins. The crew’s response—entering a hold, working through checklists, then executing a low approach—was textbook CRM and systems management under dual-fault conditions.
Communication with ATC was fluid. The crew relayed the flame event, gear uncertainty, and coordinated their subsequent approach. Emergency services were staged ahead of the final landing.
Aircraft Systems & Technical Analysis
This A321neo was powered by Pratt & Whitney PW1133G-JM geared turbofan engines. The flame event observed during the go-around is consistent with:
Compressor stall or surge due to sudden engine thrust demand Fuel-rich combustion event during spool-up Transient over-temperature or unburnt fuel ignition in exhaust duct
This behaviour, while dramatic, is not necessarily indicative of an engine fire or mechanical failure, particularly if EGT and pressure readings remained within limit. There were no ECAM fire warnings, and the engine was not shut down in flight.
The aircraft’s landing gear system—which includes position sensors, shock absorbers, and structural supports—may have sustained damage during the hard landing. Gear door misalignment, internal shock strut compression issues, or proximity sensor failure may have contributed to the abnormal configuration alerting the crew.
Runway 10 was immediately closed for Foreign Object Debris (FOD) sweep and surface inspection. Reports confirmed debris was present, substantiating the severity of the initial impact.
Passenger Experience & Cabin Conditions
Multiple passengers reported an extremely hard touchdown, followed by visible flames from the left engine, resulting in audible panic in the cabin. Cabin crew responded with reassurance and situational control, despite the lack of official fire declaration.
There were no injuries reported. Cabin lights and environmental systems remained operational, and the crew followed Frontier SOPs to prepare passengers for the second landing attempt.
Passenger feedback suggested effective communication, though the flame event led to high anxiety among those seated on the port side.
Emergency Response & Aftermath
Emergency response teams at San Juan’s Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport were placed on high alert following reports of:
Hard landing Engine flame emission Landing gear anomaly
Runway 10/28 was closed via NOTAM from 02:06 to 04:00 UTC for inspection and cleanup operations. Runway 08 was used for the low approach and final landing. After confirming the aircraft was stable and no fuel leak or fire risk remained, it was towed or guided off the active taxiway.
The aircraft remains parked at San Juan as of more than 17 hours post-landing. Frontier Airlines has not released a formal technical statement but confirmed the flight was cancelled and passengers were rebooked.
Investigation Status
The FAA has initiated a formal investigation. Initial classification: Hard landing with possible structural damage. The following elements are under review:
FDR/CVR data for vertical descent rates and impact loads Engine performance logs from both PW1133G units Landing gear status at impact and subsequent retraction/extension behaviour Runway inspection findings and debris composition Low approach video/ATC observations
The NTSB has not confirmed direct involvement yet, but given the nature of the event (dual abnormal system indications and runway damage), a field office inquiry is likely.
Root Cause & Contributing Factors
Preliminary root causes under consideration:
Excessive sink rate on final approach, potentially due to automation mismanagement, windshear, or late flare Compressor instability during go-around, aggravated by sudden throttle input Landing gear overstress, possibly affecting door positioning or internal locking mechanism
Contributing operational factors:
Night-time operations with limited visual depth cues No reported microbursts or windshear; METARs indicate calm conditions Potential delayed or rushed flare sequence during transition to touchdown
Safety Recommendations & Industry Impact
While no systemic A321neo issue has been identified, potential safety recommendations include:
Review of go-around thrust management SOPs for PW1100G-powered aircraft Refresher training on vertical rate control in visual transitions Emphasis on early flare and pitch management during night landings Enhanced cockpit alerts or dampening for premature descent or excessive sink
If structural damage is confirmed, Airbus may review nose and main gear load absorption tolerances in hard landings and possible sensor calibration for gear indication anomalies.
Conclusion
The incident involving Frontier Airlines A321neo N607FR at San Juan underscores the critical interplay of human factors, mechanical systems, and high-performance engine dynamics during non-standard landings. The combination of a severe hard touchdown, post-go-around flame event, and landing gear uncertainty prompted a high-alert sequence that was resolved with competence by the flight crew.
Ongoing investigations will determine whether training, technical malfunctions, or external conditions contributed to the incident. Regardless, the event will serve as a valuable case study in handling complex, layered abnormalities under time pressure.
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.
