A United Airlines Airbus A320 aircraft has sat idle on the ground at Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston since late April, but the facts surrounding this aircraft are quite unsettling. Not only did this aircraft suffer a tailstrike upon landing due to pilot error, but subsequent pilots operating this aircraft missed the damage on the tail, utilizing it for eight more flights before it was pulled from service.
United Airlines A320 Tailstrike At Houston Went Undetected For Eight Flights
On March 22, 2023, United Airlines 1091 landed in Houston (IAH) from Mexico City (MEX). During landing, the tail of the Airbus A320 (registration N1902U) struck the runway surface. None of the 151 passengers and six crew members onboard were injured and the aircraft taxied to the gate.
Less than two hours later, the aircraft was in the air again and operated eight more segments until extensive tail damage was noticed in Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) on March 25, 2023. From DFW, the aircraft was ferried back to IAH where it continues to sit.
Per the Aviation Herald, on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, the National (NTSB) released its final report, blaming pilot error on the tail strike:
The first officer’s failure to maintain the correct airspeed and pitch attitude during landing which resulted in a tailstrike.
Here are more details from the NTSB report:
United Airlines flight 1091 sustained a tailstrike while landing at George Bush Intercontinental Airport (KIAH), Houston, TX. The flight was a regularly scheduled international passenger flight from Mexico City, Mexico to KIAH.
According to the flight crew, the captain was the pilot monitoring, and the first officer (FO) was the pilot flying when they were cleared for the visual approach to runway 27 at KIAH. The airplane was in the landing configuration and on a stabilized approach at 1,000 ft. above ground level (AGL). About 60 ft AGL the captain noticed the airspeed begin to decay and stated watch your speed. The FO subsequently pitched the nose of the airplane down and added a little thrust. About 30 ft AGL, due to a higher-than-normal rate of descent the captain commanded flare, flare, flare. The FO flared the airplane which resulted in a firm landing. As the airplane rebounded from the firm landing the spoilers deployed resulting in a nose high attitude. In an effort to correct for the nose high attitude, the captain and FO pushed forward on their respective sidesticks.
The FO stated that the ground spoiler deployment coinciding with the firm touchdown resulted in an airplane nose-up pitch attitude. As a result, the pitch attitude increased until the tail struck the runway. After the tailstrike, the remainder of the landing and landing rollout were normal with no risk of runway overrun or excursion.
The tailstrike resulted in abrasion damage over an area of about 19 feet long by 1 foot wide along the aft lower fuselage. An inspection revealed substantial damage to the aft pressure bulkhead and frames.
I have so many questions:
- What training gap(s) caused the tailstrike in the first place?
- What happened to the visual walk-around before a flight?
- How could 19 feet of damage be simply overlooked?
- Was United’s maintenance team also derelict?
- Did the NTSB pinpoint fault via the Quick Access Recorder (QAR)?
For the sake of United and every pilot involved, I sincerely hope the damage was not clearly visible. Because if it was, there is such negligence on display then it is not unreasonable to begin to ask questions concerning systemwide safety.
CONCLUSION
Damage from a United A320 tailstrike went undetected for eight subsequent flights before the aircraft was finally pulled out of service. Not only is the pilot error upon landing concerning, but the failure to recognize the damage after is extremely alarming.
United generally does not comment on safety-related incidents, but if it chooses to provide any further context to Live And Let’s Fly, we will update this story.
“United generally does not comment on safety-related incidents” That’s because Kirby is more concerned about woke policies than safety. That is how he plans to build the best airline in the world. LOL!!!!
Yea that must be it
But according to Ben at OMAAT Kirby falls into the category of “Old Man.” Insinuating detached and oblivious old white men. If true, given the gospel of Ben, “woke” should be the last thing on Kirby’s mind.
As a 50 something white male I’m so confused anymore. But I did order a carbon monoxide detector for hotels.
This is chilling.
I thought Airbus planes operate on auto-land as default procedure
What a mess
Wonder if any pax accounts are available, or statements from the rear FA
Auto land is rarely ever used, especially in the West. It’s specifically for Cat III approaches.
Could have been another Jal 123 Though that was a bad repair but the effect could have been the same.
Was thinking the same thing. But that plane flew for how many years? Crazy and sad.
That aircraft flew for 7 years after the tailstrike.
There’s also China Airlines flight 611, a 747 that crashed due to damage from tailstrike suffered a whopping 22 years earlier.
Kirby also said this: “We’ve built the safest system in the world.” I’m sure the plane is fine (sarc)
UA is usually a lot better than this. A damaged pressure bulkhead? Yeah, that’s pretty serious. Can’t wait until Mentour Pilot features this one in one of his excellent vids.
I wonder who finally noticed the damage at DFW?
Exactly. What did happen to the visual walk around?
8 visual inspections detected nothing?
Pretty scary, huh?
Airlines are putting profits ahead of SAFETY. Back in da day, the thought of getting pax from point A to point B safely was paramount. Today, investor driven thought of profits, rewarding CEOs of “meeting these goals”, and using poorly trained staff will continue this practice of profits over SAFETY. Buy travel insurance if you’re concerned, it’s for peace of mind.
Working in the industry 30 yrs something like this is possible but unlikely. Pilot is supposed to self disclose first if all . Secondly the service check happens every other night at least. So they didn’t look hard at the tail apparently. Eight flights can EASILY occur in one day though. NFG
Glad you ordered he CO detector. Pay no attention to the rest of the stuff. Get old, own it. Wisdom (for most) comes with living. 😉
Looks like the pilot was overly confident in Airbus, because “Airbuses don’t tail-strike like the 737”
First, this accident represents a failure of multiple people and workgroups at United in recognizing and reporting this incident. Unless United can provide documentation that the pilots failed to report, then there is a systemic problem w/ internal controls. Even the flight attendants that sat in the rear jumpseats are bound to have known that there was a hard landing and likely could have heard the tail strike the runway. Rampers should have seen the damage; WN rampers are required to do aircraft checks.
Second, there is no assuming that aircraft damage has been reported. It either is documented in the logbook and maintenance has signed off on it or it has not been reported.
Third, the plane was not involved in a major accident because the A320 is built as well as it is – which is not elevating it above any other type of aircraft.
There has been a frightening increase in erosion of the mechanisms that have allowed the US aviation system to be as safe as it is. In light of other United pilot related operational incidents, you have to wonder how long it will be for the FAA to open an investigation of United – if that isn’t happening already.
Looks like united’s forced diversity hiring of pilots is paying off.
My question is was this reported by the pilots as soon as they arrived at the gate, and if so, why wasn’t a full inspection including X-raying the fuselage if necessary, and complete repairing done before the plane was allowed to fly again?