Dual aircraft equipment problems malfunctions in an A-320 after a 'firm' touchdown experience. Go ar...

Attributes
ACN	303704
Time
Date	199504
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : dtw
State Reference	MI
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 50
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : dtw artcc : zbw
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer observation : company check pilot oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 7100 flight time type : 1300
ASRS Report	303704
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain instruction : trainee
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	inflight encounter other other anomaly other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	other other
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Weather
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

In landing flare experienced wind shear requiring rejected landing. Aircraft main gear contacted runway surface during reject. No damage to aircraft. However we suffered a loss of 1 brake system (they are very finicky) and 1 radio management panel stopped working. This, I assume, was the result of the 'jolt' from the contact with the runway. We reported the wind shear to the tower (made a PIREP) and the shear was confirmed by one other aircraft landing behind us. It's difficult to say just how much airspeed loss we encountered but it was enough to increase the sink rate considerably. While touchdown during the reject was 'firm' it could not have been considered 'hard.' the next approach/landing were uneventful. Lesson learned: with strong, gusty xwinds wind shear could be present even though it's not reported or forecast -- be alert! Get report to tower quicker so other aircraft can be advised -- there was a somewhat lengthy delay from the time we rejected to the time we actually reported the shear...it took quite some time to figure out just what had happened. If we had been quicker with our report the other aircraft landing behind us would have known what to expect!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DUAL ACFT EQUIP PROBS MALFUNCTIONS IN AN A-320 AFTER A 'FIRM' TOUCHDOWN EXPERIENCE. GAR EXECUTED.

Narrative: IN LNDG FLARE EXPERIENCED WIND SHEAR REQUIRING REJECTED LNDG. ACFT MAIN GEAR CONTACTED RWY SURFACE DURING REJECT. NO DAMAGE TO ACFT. HOWEVER WE SUFFERED A LOSS OF 1 BRAKE SYS (THEY ARE VERY FINICKY) AND 1 RADIO MGMNT PANEL STOPPED WORKING. THIS, I ASSUME, WAS THE RESULT OF THE 'JOLT' FROM THE CONTACT WITH THE RWY. WE RPTED THE WIND SHEAR TO THE TWR (MADE A PIREP) AND THE SHEAR WAS CONFIRMED BY ONE OTHER ACFT LNDG BEHIND US. IT'S DIFFICULT TO SAY JUST HOW MUCH AIRSPD LOSS WE ENCOUNTERED BUT IT WAS ENOUGH TO INCREASE THE SINK RATE CONSIDERABLY. WHILE TOUCHDOWN DURING THE REJECT WAS 'FIRM' IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED 'HARD.' THE NEXT APCH/LNDG WERE UNEVENTFUL. LESSON LEARNED: WITH STRONG, GUSTY XWINDS WIND SHEAR COULD BE PRESENT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT RPTED OR FORECAST -- BE ALERT! GET RPT TO TWR QUICKER SO OTHER ACFT CAN BE ADVISED -- THERE WAS A SOMEWHAT LENGTHY DELAY FROM THE TIME WE REJECTED TO THE TIME WE ACTUALLY RPTED THE SHEAR...IT TOOK QUITE SOME TIME TO FIGURE OUT JUST WHAT HAD HAPPENED. IF WE HAD BEEN QUICKER WITH OUR RPT THE OTHER ACFT LNDG BEHIND US WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT TO EXPECT!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Dual aircraft equipment problems malfunctions in an A-320 after a 'firm' touchdown experience. Go around executed.