Primary finding
Probable cause
The pilot's improper decision to land with excessive airspeed during the approach and failure to obtain the proper touchdown point, which resulted in a runway overrun. Contributing factors were the pilot's failure execute a missed approach, to use available reverse thrust in a timely manner, and the wet, ungrooved, downsloped runway.
Investigator assessment
Analysis narrative
Prior to departure, the airplane was fueled with approximately 17,500 pounds (lbs) of fuel, which allowed a landing weight at the destination of greater than 2,000 lbs. under maximum gross landing weight. The pilot "did not use wet runway performance numbers...[and] did note the 135 landing distance requirements as an aid for safety margin; approximately 6,600 feet." During the downwind leg to runway 26, the crew could see the runway. Prior to the final approach fix for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 26 and approximately 8 miles from the airport, the crew had the runway in sight. The pilot flew the airplane on the glideslope approximately VRef (Final Approach Speed) 128 knots plus 10-15 knots, then below 1,000 feet, VRef plus 10 knots. The crew reported that the airplane touched down approximately 1,500 feet from the approach end of runway 26. The co-pilot reported the airbrake was in the #2 position and they had "good anti-skid indication" after touchdown. The pilot began braking, deployed the thrust reverser, and continued to increase brake pressure. With approximately 2,500 feet of runway remaining, the airplane continued to not decelerate normally, and the pilot knew they did not have enough runway to execute a go-around. With approximately 1,000 feet of runway remaining, the pilot pulled the parking brake to the second detent, and the aircraft slid off the end of the runway into the dirt and muddy terrain. A performance study revealed that the accident flight crossed the runway 26 threshold at 150 knots airspeed (VRef plus 22 knots) and touched down 2,300 feet from the threshold at 141 knots airspeed (VRef plus 13 knots), with a minus 1 foot per second vertical speed. Immediately at touchdown, the spoilers were deployed. Approximately 4 seconds later and 3,260 feet from the threshold (3,740 feet of landing distance remaining), the thrust reverser was fully deployed with engine 2 fan speed (N1) reaching about 100 percent 9 seconds later. The airplane continued to roll down the runway with the thrust reverser deployed and exited the end of the runway at about 65 knots ground speed coming to a stop in the safety area approximately 268 feet from the end of runway 26. The airport featured one ungrooved asphalt runway, Runway 8/26, which was 7,000 feet by 100 feet, and had a 1.25 percent downslope gradient to the west. According to the airport/facilities directory, the airport remarks section notes, "Runway 08-26 slick when wet, airport manager recommends landing uphill on runway 08 when able." The accident airplane's flight manual does not provide any data on runway slope effect on the landing distance, therefore, the distances mentioned above would increase for landing on runway 26 which has a negative (down) 1.25 percent slope. Since 2001, 12 business jet aircraft have experienced a runway overrun on runway 26. All but one of the overruns included "wet" runway conditions. Since the accident, the runway has been grooved and plans are proceeding with a runway improvement project.
Source record
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHT On March 23, 2007, approximately 2105 mountain daylight time, a Dassault Aviation Mystere Falcon 900C business jet, N129KJ, sustained substantial damage during a runway overrun while landing at Garfield County Regional Airport (RIL), Rifle, Colorado. The certificated airline transport pilot, co-pilot, and flight attendant were not injured. The airplane was operated by XOJET, Inc., McClellan, California, and registered to Ohana Aircraft Ltd. LLC., Redwood City, California. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 positioning flight. The flight departed Scottsdale, Arizona, and was destined for RIL. According to statements submitted by the pilot and co-pilot, prior to departure, the airplane was fueled with approximately 17,500 pounds (lbs) of fuel, which allowed a landing weight at RIL of greater than 2,000 lbs. under maximum gross landing weight. The crew stated that they had operated in and out of RIL many times in the past several days, and the pilot "was very comfortable with the weather [and] performance numbers planned." The pilot remembered observing a weather report that reported light rain at RIL; however, the report was not current after the flight departed Scottsdale. The pilot "did not use wet runway performance numbers...[and] did note the 135 landing distance requirements as an aid for safety margin; approximately 6,600 feet." The crew reported the en route portion of the flight was uneventful. As the airplane approached RIL, the crew checked the automated surface observing system (ASOS) report which reported the sky overcast at 4,000 feet and no rain. During the downwind leg to runway 26, the crew could see the runway. Prior to the final approach fix for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 26 and approximately 8 miles from the airport, the crew had the runway in sight. The crew communicated their intentions on the RIL common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). The pilot flew the airplane on the glideslope approximately Vref (Final Approach Speed) 128 knots plus 10-15 knots, then below 1,000 feet, Vref plus 10 knots. The pilot stated that the airplane touched down approximately 1,500 feet from the approach end of runway 26. The co-pilot reported the airbrake was in the #2 position and they had "good anti-skid indication" after touchdown. The pilot "began braking, deployed the thrust reverser, [and] continued to increase brake pressure as it didn't seem like a normal deceleration rate. [Co-pilot] said, 'Get on it' and [the pilot] replied, 'I am' as I had max brakes applied and full reverse." With approximately 2,500 feet of runway remaining, the airplane continued to not decelerate normally, and the pilot knew they did not have enough runway to execute a go-around. With approximately 1,000 feet of runway remaining, the pilot pulled the parking brake to the second detent, and the aircraft slid off the end of the runway into the dirt and muddy terrain. The crew shutdown the engines and exited the airplane via the forward cabin door. A witness reported that during the accident, he was on the ramp across from the airport gate 2 and was waiting to the airplane after landing and taxi. He stated that the ramp was wet from rain that had ended about 30 minutes prior to the accident. The witness reported, "The approach speed for the aircraft looked to be fast. The [aircraft's] main wheels touched down between [taxiway intersection] alpha 4 and alpha 5, right about straight north of the airport gate 2. When the aircraft reached alpha 4, the nose wheel touched down. I heard the thrust reverser deploy about the 3,000 foot marker...The runway and taxiway alpha were wet from the rain." Alpha 4 taxiway intersection was located approximately 2,000 feet from runway 26 threshold and Alpha 5 was located approximately 2,700 feet from runway 26 threshold. PERSONNEL INFORMATION The pilot, age 38, held an airline transport pilot certificate with type ratings for Boeing 757, Boeing 767, Cessna CE-500, Cessna CE-750, and Dassault DA-50 airplanes. She also held a commercial pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single-engine land. Her most recent first-class medical certificate was issued on November 28, 2006, with no limitations or restrictions. On March 2, 2007, the pilot completed a Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 135 Airman Competency/Proficiency Check. The check was conducted in a Cessna CE-750, Level D simulator, and satisfactorily completed. On August 4, 2006, the pilot completed a FAR Part 135 Airman Competency/Proficiency Check. The check was conducted in the Dassault DA-900 EX, Level D simulator, and satisfactorily completed. According to the Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report (NTSB Form 6120.1), the pilot had accumulated 8,496 total flight hours and 350 in the accident airplane make and model, of which 290 were recorded as pilot-in-command (PIC). In the 90 days preceding the accident, the pilot had accumulated 195 total flight hours, of which 193 were in the accident airplane make and model, and 75 total hours in the 30 days preceding the accident. The co-pilot, age 42, held an airline transport certificate with type ratings for Beech BE-1900, Cessna CE-500, Cessna CE-750, and Dassault DA-50 airplanes. He also held a commercial pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single-engine land. His most recent first-class medical certificate was issued on December 11, 2006, with a limitation for corrective lenses. On November 21, 2006, the co-pilot completed a FAR Part 135 Airman Competency/Proficiency Check. The check was conducted in the Cessna CE-750, Level D simulator, and satisfactorily completed. On May 20, 2006, the pilot completed a FAR Part 135 Airman Competency/Proficiency Check. The check was conducted in the Dassault DA-900 EX, Level D simulator, and satisfactorily completed. According to the NTSB Form 6120.1, the co-pilot had accumulated 7,878 total flight hours and 897 in the accident airplane make and model, of which 763 were recorded as pilot-in-command (PIC). In the 90 days preceding the accident, the pilot had accumulated 37 total flight hours, of which all were in the accident airplane make and model, and 28 total hours in the 30 days preceding the accident. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION The 2000-model Dassault Aviation Mystere Falcon 900C, serial number 184, was issued an airworthiness certificate on October 3, 2000. The airplane was configured to carry 14 passengers, one cabin crewmember, and two pilots. The airplane was equipped with three Honeywell TFE 731-58R turbofan engines rated at 4,750 pounds (lbs) of thrust. The airplane was maintained under a continuous airworthiness program, and the most recent inspection was completed on March 8, 2007. At the time of the accident, the airframe had accumulated 3,130 flight hours. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION At 2053, the RIL ASOS reported the wind calm, 10 statute miles visibility, sky overcast at 3,900 feet, decreasing rain, temperature 8 degrees Celsius, dew point 6 degrees Celsius, and an altimeter setting of 29.98 inches of Mercury. AERODROME INFORMATION The Garfield County Regional Airport, RIL, was a public, uncontrolled airport located approximately 3 miles east of Rifle, Colorado, at 39 degrees, 31.578 minutes north latitude, and 107 degrees, 43.616 minutes west longitude, at a surveyed elevation of 5,544 feet. The airport featured one ungrooved asphalt runway, Runway 8/26, which was 7,000 feet by 100 feet. The runway had a 1.25 percent downslope gradient to the west. According to the airport/facilities directory, the airport remarks section notes, "Runway 08-26 slick when wet, airport manager recommends landing uphill on runway 08 when able." FLIGHT RECORDERS The Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) installed on the