Date: 21st November 2024
Location: Stockholm Arlanda Airport, Sweden
Aircraft: Airbus A330-300, registration LN-RKM
Operator: SAS Scandinavian Airlines
Flight Number: SK-903
Flight Route: Stockholm (Sweden) to Newark, NJ (USA)
Passengers and Crew: Not disclosed
Summary of Events
On 21st November 2024, SAS Scandinavian Airlines Flight SK-903, an Airbus A330-300 departing Stockholm Arlanda Airport for Newark, NJ, experienced a tail strike during takeoff from Runway 01L. Despite the incident, the crew continued the climb to FL360 and proceeded en route.
Approximately 450 nautical miles north of Copenhagen, the crew decided to divert to Copenhagen Airport (EKCH) as a precaution. The aircraft landed safely on Runway 22L about 75 minutes after initiating the diversion. No injuries were reported.
A replacement aircraft was dispatched to complete the flight to Newark, resulting in a delay of approximately six hours. The occurrence aircraft remains grounded in Copenhagen as of 26th November 2024.
Aircraft and Crew Information
The Airbus A330-300, registration LN-RKM, is a long-haul wide-body aircraft designed for intercontinental flights. SAS has a history of operating A330s for its transatlantic routes, with this particular aircraft being part of the fleet for several years.
The crew consisted of experienced pilots trained in managing in-flight anomalies. Their decision to continue the climb and later divert to Copenhagen reflected a careful balance between operational judgment and passenger safety.
Sequence of Events
1. Takeoff and Tail Strike:
During takeoff from Runway 01L at Stockholm Arlanda, the tail of the A330-300 struck the runway surface. The crew continued the climb without immediate indication of significant structural damage.
2. En Route Decision to Divert:
Approximately 450 nautical miles north of Copenhagen, the crew elected to divert as a precaution. The decision was influenced by the potential structural impacts of the tail strike, which required further inspection.
3. Safe Landing at Copenhagen:
The aircraft landed without further incident on Runway 22L at Copenhagen Airport, where passengers and crew disembarked safely.
4. Operational Recovery:
A replacement A330-300 (registration LN-RKO) was dispatched to transport passengers to Newark, resulting in a six-hour delay.
Initial Investigation and Analysis
The Swedish and Danish aviation authorities, in collaboration with Airbus and SAS, are conducting an investigation into the tail strike. Key areas of focus include:
1. Takeoff Technique and Aircraft Configuration:
• Examining whether the tail strike resulted from excessive rotation during takeoff.
• Reviewing the aircraft’s weight and balance calculations, including passenger, cargo, and fuel loads.
2. Aircraft Systems and Performance:
• Assessing whether any aircraft systems, such as pitch trim or thrust settings, contributed to the incident.
• Evaluating the performance of the flight control systems during the takeoff roll and rotation.
3. Structural Assessment:
• Inspecting the aircraft’s fuselage for damage resulting from the tail strike.
• Determining whether any temporary or permanent repairs are required.
4. Crew Decision-Making:
• Analyzing the crew’s decision to continue the flight to cruising altitude and later divert to Copenhagen.
• Reviewing adherence to standard operating procedures (SOPs) during and after the incident.
Potential Contributing Factors
1. Excessive Pitch Angle During Rotation:
Tail strikes often occur when the aircraft’s nose is raised too steeply during takeoff, causing the tail to contact the runway.
2. Aircraft Loading:
Incorrect weight and balance calculations can lead to improper rotation dynamics, increasing the risk of tail strikes.
3. Environmental Factors:
Runway conditions, weather, or crosswinds may have influenced the takeoff trajectory.
4. Crew Communication and Coordination:
Inadequate communication or situational awareness among the flight crew could have delayed corrective actions during rotation.
Passenger and Crew Impact
There were no reported injuries among passengers or crew. SAS arranged accommodations and alternate travel plans for affected passengers, minimizing disruption to their journeys.
Conclusions
The tail strike incident involving SAS Flight SK-903 highlights the risks associated with takeoff dynamics, particularly during long-haul operations. While the decision to continue the flight initially was based on available indicators, the precautionary diversion to Copenhagen ensured the safety of passengers and allowed for a thorough inspection of the aircraft.
The findings from this investigation will inform operational practices, training programs, and aircraft handling procedures to mitigate the risk of similar occurrences.
Recommendations
1. Enhanced Training for Takeoff Dynamics:
• Flight crews should receive additional simulator-based training to practice managing pitch angles and rotation dynamics during takeoff.
2. Rigorous Weight and Balance Checks:
• Airlines should emphasize strict adherence to weight and balance calculations to ensure optimal aircraft performance during critical phases of flight.
3. Structural Monitoring Systems:
• Consider installing advanced sensors to detect and report structural impacts, such as tail strikes, in real time.
4. Incident Reporting and Sharing:
• Operators and regulatory bodies should share data from tail strike incidents to improve industry-wide understanding and prevention strategies.
Safety Lessons and Industry Impact
This incident underscores the importance of precise aircraft handling during takeoff, particularly for long-haul flights where load factors are critical. The investigation findings are expected to improve training and operational standards across the industry, contributing to enhanced safety for wide-body operations.
Disclaimer
If you are the rightful owner of the photo and wish it to be taken down, please email takedown@cockpitking.com.
Our investigation reports are based on all the evidence and facts we have at the time of writing and posting. We apologise if any details are missed or are not fully accurate.
