|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1801 To 2400|
|Locale Reference||airport : zzz.airport|
|Altitude||agl single value : 0|
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 121|
|Flight Phase||ground : taxi|
landing : roll
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Anomaly||non adherence : company policies|
non adherence : clearance
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : unable|
|Consequence||faa : reviewed incident with flight crew|
|Problem Areas||Environmental Factor|
|Primary Problem||Environmental Factor|
I was the pm. Approaching ZZZ; we were assigned runway 22R. ATIS gathered; approach properly briefed; with flaps 40 degrees and medium brakes applied. Braking action was requested from tower; and they replied braking action good. Landing weight was 128000 pounds. Approach proceeded normally. During the flare I commented 'there appears to be more snow on the runway than we expected!' touchdown was normal at approximately 1000 ft down; autobrakes and spoilers operated normally; with anti-skid slowly cycling. Tower asked if we could clear at taxiway C; and at first I stated that it appeared that we could make taxiway C. The first officer (who; by the way; did an excellent job this entire incident; as well as a great job for the entire sequence) applied manual braking. At that point the anti-skid went into a constant cycling mode; and braking action rapidly deteriorated due to the increase of ice and snow on the runway. We passed taxiway C with too much speed to turn off; and I advised ATC. The following aircraft was sent around. ATC then asked if we could turn right on runway 27; and taxi to the end. I again stated that I believed so; and the first officer and I xferred aircraft control. I was surprised at the lack of braking effectiveness; and as I struggled to slow and control the aircraft; I missed the turnoff to runway 27. I believe this was due to the lack of braking and the runway/taxiway signage being obscured by ice and snow. We slowed the aircraft to a stop at the end of runway 22R; and asked tower which way they wished us to turn to clear the runway. They cleared us to turn left on taxiway east; and join taxiway B to parking. As I attempted to turn the aircraft left; the nosewheel began skidding; and was totally ineffective. I attempted to use asymmetric braking and thrust to no avail; so I stopped the aircraft. I again tried to turn left; but the nosewheel skidded straight ahead towards the edge of the taxiway. A west wind of 8 KTS probably exacerbated the difficulty of turning left as well. At that point I stopped; engaged the parking brake; and advised ATC that we would not be able to clear the runway; that we required a tug; and that we estimated that the braking action for the last 2000 ft of runway 22R was nil. The aircraft never departed the taxiway or prepared surface; but a taxi light had to be removed by airport personnel to allow the tug to push us back about 100-150 ft so taxi could be resumed. There was no damage to the aircraft or airport facilities; and no one was injured. Ground gave us a number to call as we were taxiing to the gate; and I called that number to give ZZZ operations my report. What I will do different in the future: never assume that the runway conditions are the same for the entire length of the runway; and during the brief of the approach in these conditions (icy; short runway; heavy landing weight) take note of not only the approach lights; runway markings; frequencys; missed approach; etc (as we always do); but also the end of the runway; its lights; txwys; geometry; etc. Incidentally; I have a copy of the ATIS; and there were no braking action advisories listed.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 EXPERIENCED NIL BRAKING AFTER LNDG AND WAS UNABLE TO EXIT THE RWY. A TUG WAS CALLED TO REMOVE THE ACFT. NO BRAKING ACTION RPTS HAD BEEN ISSUED.
Narrative: I WAS THE PM. APCHING ZZZ; WE WERE ASSIGNED RWY 22R. ATIS GATHERED; APCH PROPERLY BRIEFED; WITH FLAPS 40 DEGS AND MEDIUM BRAKES APPLIED. BRAKING ACTION WAS REQUESTED FROM TWR; AND THEY REPLIED BRAKING ACTION GOOD. LNDG WT WAS 128000 LBS. APCH PROCEEDED NORMALLY. DURING THE FLARE I COMMENTED 'THERE APPEARS TO BE MORE SNOW ON THE RWY THAN WE EXPECTED!' TOUCHDOWN WAS NORMAL AT APPROX 1000 FT DOWN; AUTOBRAKES AND SPOILERS OPERATED NORMALLY; WITH ANTI-SKID SLOWLY CYCLING. TWR ASKED IF WE COULD CLR AT TXWY C; AND AT FIRST I STATED THAT IT APPEARED THAT WE COULD MAKE TXWY C. THE FO (WHO; BY THE WAY; DID AN EXCELLENT JOB THIS ENTIRE INCIDENT; AS WELL AS A GREAT JOB FOR THE ENTIRE SEQUENCE) APPLIED MANUAL BRAKING. AT THAT POINT THE ANTI-SKID WENT INTO A CONSTANT CYCLING MODE; AND BRAKING ACTION RAPIDLY DETERIORATED DUE TO THE INCREASE OF ICE AND SNOW ON THE RWY. WE PASSED TXWY C WITH TOO MUCH SPD TO TURN OFF; AND I ADVISED ATC. THE FOLLOWING ACFT WAS SENT AROUND. ATC THEN ASKED IF WE COULD TURN R ON RWY 27; AND TAXI TO THE END. I AGAIN STATED THAT I BELIEVED SO; AND THE FO AND I XFERRED ACFT CTL. I WAS SURPRISED AT THE LACK OF BRAKING EFFECTIVENESS; AND AS I STRUGGLED TO SLOW AND CTL THE ACFT; I MISSED THE TURNOFF TO RWY 27. I BELIEVE THIS WAS DUE TO THE LACK OF BRAKING AND THE RWY/TXWY SIGNAGE BEING OBSCURED BY ICE AND SNOW. WE SLOWED THE ACFT TO A STOP AT THE END OF RWY 22R; AND ASKED TWR WHICH WAY THEY WISHED US TO TURN TO CLR THE RWY. THEY CLRED US TO TURN L ON TXWY E; AND JOIN TXWY B TO PARKING. AS I ATTEMPTED TO TURN THE ACFT L; THE NOSEWHEEL BEGAN SKIDDING; AND WAS TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE. I ATTEMPTED TO USE ASYMMETRIC BRAKING AND THRUST TO NO AVAIL; SO I STOPPED THE ACFT. I AGAIN TRIED TO TURN L; BUT THE NOSEWHEEL SKIDDED STRAIGHT AHEAD TOWARDS THE EDGE OF THE TXWY. A W WIND OF 8 KTS PROBABLY EXACERBATED THE DIFFICULTY OF TURNING L AS WELL. AT THAT POINT I STOPPED; ENGAGED THE PARKING BRAKE; AND ADVISED ATC THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CLR THE RWY; THAT WE REQUIRED A TUG; AND THAT WE ESTIMATED THAT THE BRAKING ACTION FOR THE LAST 2000 FT OF RWY 22R WAS NIL. THE ACFT NEVER DEPARTED THE TXWY OR PREPARED SURFACE; BUT A TAXI LIGHT HAD TO BE REMOVED BY ARPT PERSONNEL TO ALLOW THE TUG TO PUSH US BACK ABOUT 100-150 FT SO TAXI COULD BE RESUMED. THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE ACFT OR ARPT FACILITIES; AND NO ONE WAS INJURED. GND GAVE US A NUMBER TO CALL AS WE WERE TAXIING TO THE GATE; AND I CALLED THAT NUMBER TO GIVE ZZZ OPS MY RPT. WHAT I WILL DO DIFFERENT IN THE FUTURE: NEVER ASSUME THAT THE RWY CONDITIONS ARE THE SAME FOR THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE RWY; AND DURING THE BRIEF OF THE APCH IN THESE CONDITIONS (ICY; SHORT RWY; HVY LNDG WT) TAKE NOTE OF NOT ONLY THE APCH LIGHTS; RWY MARKINGS; FREQS; MISSED APCH; ETC (AS WE ALWAYS DO); BUT ALSO THE END OF THE RWY; ITS LIGHTS; TXWYS; GEOMETRY; ETC. INCIDENTALLY; I HAVE A COPY OF THE ATIS; AND THERE WERE NO BRAKING ACTION ADVISORIES LISTED.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.