| A logical 
			Explanation for the TAM A320 Accident's Observed Runway
			Events at Congonhas  To be crystal clear, we'll start off with 
			the conclusion (that's based upon the histories and 
			observations/links provided below): a.  It would appear that TAM Flt JJ3054 did land a 
			little far in and a little hot. b.  Once established with the left-hand engine in 
			reverse and spoilers deployed, it then became apparent to the 
			handling pilot that a (typical Ibiza style) A320 wheel-braking 
			failure had occurred (i.e. the never totally resolved BSCU failure 
			mode). c.  Both recognizing and resolving this situation 
			can be a very runway- and time-consuming affair (see below on 03 Aug 
			2003 accident to A320 regn C-FTDF at
			
			http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/C-FTDF.pdf ), so the 
			captain understandably aware of the lethal lack of an overrun, 
			decided to apply power and go-round. d.  An engine going from full rev to full 
			forward thrust could possibly suffer a compressor stall while the 
			reverser doors are closing. The A320 Thrust reverser can take up to 5 secs 
			to re-stow, so the application of TOGA power caused a predictable 
			compressor surge on the LH engine well after the RH engine had 
			gained full power, thus causing the first flash seen on the video 
			and the divergence  (due to the considerable thrust asymmetry) well left of the 
			centerline. e. However even if the pilots did NOT apply power 
			in an attempt to go round, leaving the throttle of the engine (#1) 
			with the locked-out reverser up at 22.5 degrees (i.e. not retarding 
			it to idle at the "retard" call, would allow that engine to 
			automatically go to TOGA once the auto-throttle disconnected. In 
			addition the spoilers would not auto-deploy nor the autobrake 
			operate. It's a nasty trap and a facet of Airbus operation that 
			isn't often encountered and can easily be overlooked. See what one 
			pilot said about his own personal experience: 
				
					
						| This, to me, is so relevant; happened to me when I 
						was a brand new skipper, first flight after a month's 
						vacation, new FO, dispatch with one reverser inop. First 
						two sectors went without incident but on the third (FO's 
						leg) I reminded him of the inop reverser. 
						Retrospectively he removed his hand completely from that 
						thrust lever; it was midnight, dark cockpit. At the 
						flare & "Retard" call he therefore only closed the 
						"operative" TL. The aircraft squawked "Retard" at least 
						five times and then after the two second latch, the 
						engine that still had it's TL in the Climb detent went 
						to TOGA. Aircraft yawed significantly and came 
						dangerously close to the edge of the runway (we were at 
						about 5 feet AGL). I took control, whammed the other TL 
						closed and got the aircraft back on the black stuff. Was 
						a long runway, CAVOK & wind calm. Glad it wasn't on a 
						short, wet strip. 
 I know the "wait until the investigation" but that's it 
						for me.
 |  
						| 
							Originally Posted by Aviation Safety Council 
							of Taiwan 
							3.1 Findings Related to 
							Probable Causes 
							1. When the aircraft was below 20 ft RA and Retard 
							warnings were sounded, the pilot flying didn’t pull 
							thrust lever 2 to Idle detent which caused the 
							ground spoilers to not deploy after touchdown though 
							they were at Armed position, and therefore the auto 
							braking system was not triggered. 
							Moreover, when the auto thrust was changed to manual 
							operation mode automatically after touchdown, the 
							thrust lever 2 was remained at 22.5 degrees which 
							caused the Engine 2 still had an larger thrust 
							output (EPR1.08) than idle position’s. Thereupon, 
							the aircraft was not able to complete deceleration 
							within the residual length of the runway, and 
							deviated from the runway before came to a full stop, 
							even though the manual braking was actuated by 
							the pilot 13 seconds after touchdown . 
							(1.11.2、2.3.2、2.3.3、2.4)
  2. The pilot monitoring announced “spoiler” automatically when the 
							aircraft touched down without checking the ECAM 
							display first according to SOP before made the 
							announcement, as such the retraction of ground 
							spoilerswas ignored. (2.3.3)
 |  f.  Thus probably not a lot to do with the lack of 
			runway grooving, but possibly directly related to the runway length 
			and abysmal lack of a usable RESA (Runway End Safety Area).... 
			and the resulting pilot apprehension. | 
		
			| The 
			information above and below is relevant - but dated. A 
			clearer explanation of findings and a likely scenario is at 
			http://tinyurl.com/2dpkwa | 
		
			| About 
			the spoilers – if you watch the last few seconds of video a few 
			times, you might notice the dark area over the wing – it may mean 
			that the spoilers were up at that late point. If so, that would 
			probably finish the attempted Go-Around idea. However it's only 
			surmise and all a bit tenuous.
			Better pointers to a likely 
			cause are contained within the next two accident reviews. The 
			history of Airbus wheel-braking anomalies as disclosed by the A320 
			crash at Ibiza then becomes very relevant as the reason for the crew 
			having attempted a late go-round. The 
			directional control problems in the America West A320 accident below 
			is pertinent as it was the RH (#2) thrust reverser on the TAM A320 
			that was OUT of SERVICE. The TAM crew ended up well LEFT of 
			centerline in impacting the TAM Cargo Building so that divergence to 
			the LEFT would be easily explained by the RH engine being 
			intentionally TOGA'd (i.e. the button-pressed for go-round power). 
			The braking fault (see later) would have been the reason for them 
			NEEDING to go round. 
			 from N635AW accident (next below): "In 
			an effort at maintaining directional control, the captain then moved 
			the #1 thrust lever out of reverse and inadvertently moved it to the 
			Take-Off/Go-Around (TOGA) position, while leaving the #2 thrust 
			lever in the full reverse position."
 Not sure this throttle movement is possible on a 737 but it appears 
			so on an AB. It may be relevant to the TAM accident - and perhaps it 
			needs to be looked at by AirBus.
 
			Read on..... | 
		
			| NTSB Identification: LAX02FA266. The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please 
			contact Records 
			Management Division
 Scheduled 14 CFR Part 121: Air Carrier operation of
			AMERICA WEST AIRLINES (D.B.A. America 
			West Airlines)
 Accident occurred Wednesday, August 28, 2002 in Phoenix, AZ
 Probable Cause Approval Date: 9/13/2005
 Aircraft: Airbus Industrie 
			A320-231, registration: N635AW
 Injuries: 1 Serious, 9 Minor, 149 Uninjured.
 After an asymmetrical deployment of the 
			thrust reversers during landing rollout deceleration, the captain 
			failed to maintain directional control of the airplane and it veered 
			off the runway, collapsing the nose gear and damaging the forward 
			fuselage. Several days before the flight the #1 thrust reverser had 
			been rendered inoperative and mechanically locked in the stowed 
			position by maintenance personnel. In accordance with approved 
			minimum equipment list (MEL) procedures, the airplane was allowed to 
			continue in service with a conspicuous placard noting the 
			inoperative status of the #1 reverser placed next to the engine's 
			thrust lever. When this crew picked up the airplane at the departure 
			airport, the inbound crew briefed the captain on the status of the 
			#1 thrust reverser. The captain was the flying pilot for this leg of 
			the flight and the airplane touched down on the centerline of the 
			runway about 1,200 feet beyond its threshold. The captain moved both 
			thrust levers into the reverse position and the airplane began 
			yawing right. In an effort at 
			maintaining directional control, the captain then moved the #1 
			thrust lever out of reverse and inadvertently moved it to the 
			Take-Off/Go-Around (TOGA) position, while leaving the #2 thrust 
			lever in the full reverse position.
			The thrust asymmetry created by the left engine at TOGA power 
			with the right engine in full reverse greatly increased the right 
			yaw forces, and they were not adequately compensated for by the 
			crew's application of rudder and brake inputs. Upon veering off the 
			side of the runway onto the dirt infield, the nose gear strut 
			collapsed. The airplane slid to a stop in a nose down pitch 
			attitude, about 7,650 feet from the threshold. There was no fire. 
			Company procedures required the flying pilot (the captain) to give 
			an approach and landing briefing to the nonflying pilot (first 
			officer). The captain did not brief the first officer regarding the 
			thrust reverser's MEL'd status, nor was he specifically required to 
			do so by the company operations manual. Also, the first officer did 
			not remind the captain of its status, nor was there a specific 
			requirement to do so. The operations manual did state that the 
			approach briefing should include, among other things, "the landing 
			flap setting...target airspeed...autobrake level (if desired) 
			consistent with runway length, desired stopping distance, and any 
			special problems." The airline's crew resource management procedures 
			tasked the nonflying pilot to be supportive of the flying pilot and 
			backup his performance if pertinent items were omitted from the 
			approach briefing. The maintenance, repair history, and 
			functionality of various components associated with the airplane's 
			directional control systems were evaluated, including the brake 
			system, the nose landing gear strut and wheels, the brakes, the 
			antiskid system, the thrust levers and reversers, and the throttle 
			control unit. No discrepancies were found regarding these 
			components. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable 
			cause(s) of this accident as follows: The captain's failure to maintain directional control and his 
			inadvertent application of asymmetrical engine thrust while 
			attempting to move the #1 thrust lever out of reverse. A factor in 
			the accident was the crew's inadequate coordination and crew 
			resource management. from
			
			this link 
			
			
			Full narrative available
   | 
		
			| 
				Narrative:
					| Date: | 09 JUL 2006 |  
					| Time: | ca 07:50 |  
					| Type: | Airbus A.310-324 |  
					| Operator: | S7 Airlines |  
					| Registration: | F-OGYP |  
					| C/n / msn: | 442 |  
					| First flight: | 1987-04-03 |  
					| Engines: | 2 Pratt & Whitney PW4152 |  
					| Crew: | Fatalities: 5 / Occupants: 8 |  
					| Passengers: | Fatalities: 120 / Occupants: 195 |  
					| Total: | Fatalities: 125 / Occupants: 203 |  
					| Airplane damage: | Written off |  
					| Location: | Irkutsk Airport (IKT) (Russia)  |  
					| Phase: | Landing |  
					| Nature: | Domestic Scheduled Passenger |  
					| Departure airport: | Moskva-Domodedovo Airport (DME/UUDD), Russia |  
					| Destination airport: | Irkutsk Airport (IKT/UIII), Russia |  
					| Flightnumber: | 778 |  Sibir flight 778 departed Domodeovo (DME) at 
			night for a flight to Irkutsk (IKT). Weather at Irkutsk was poor. It 
			was raining, overcast clouds at 600 feet and a thunderstorm in the 
			area. The Airbus landed on runway 30 (concrete, 3165 m / 10343 feet 
			long). Since the no.1 engine 
			thrust reverser on the airplane was de-activated, this engine's 
			thrust was brought back to idle. The no.2 engine thrust reversers 
			were deployed normally. While handling the throttles, the pilot 
			inadvertently touched the no.1 power lever, increasing engine thrust 
			and causing a loss of directional control. The co-pilot did 
			not adequately monitor the engine parameters and failed to note the 
			lack of deceleration. At a speed of approx. 80 km/h the Airbus 
			overran the runway. It collided with a concrete barrier and burst 
			into flames.
 Weather around the time of the accident (23:00 UTC / 08:00 local) 
			was: UIII 082300Z 28005MPS 3500 -SHRA OVC006CB 11/09 Q1002 NOSIG RMK 
			QBB190 QFE707/0943 30290250= (Wind 280 degrees at 5m/sec visibility 
			3500m, light rain showers, 8 oktas overcast cloud at 600ft with 
			thunder clouds, temperature 11C dewpoint 9C, QNH 1002hPa no 
			significant weather)
 "When he pressed the switch for the 
			reversing system, located between the pilots' seats, with one finger 
			of his right hand, Shibanov most likely bumped the handle that 
			controlled the left, deactivated engine, located only centimeters 
			away, with his other fingers. As a result, he simultaneously turned 
			on the right reversing system and left takeoff system and the 
			plane picked up speed, turning to the right, hitting garages and 
			bursting into flames.  Pilots 
			questioned by Kommersant say that the cause of the crash should be 
			attributed to the error of the dispatcher and the unfortunate design 
			of the plane's cockpit: the controls for the throttle and the 
			reversing system can be pressed simultaneously when reaching for 
			only one of them, especially in an emergency situation. On an 
			aircraft of that class, it would be possible electronically to 
			prevent the activation of the forward throttle while turning on the 
			reversing system."  
			
			http://www.kommersant.com/p724140/Irkutsk_A310_Crash/ 
			 | 
		
			| 
				
					| 
						
						
						Narrative:
						Flight 794 departed Houston with a an 
						inoperative nr. 1 thrust reverser. On August 20, 2002, 
						the number one thrust reverser had been deactivated by 
						maintenance personnel. The airplane touched down at 
						Phoenix on the centerline of runway 08 about 1,200 feet 
						beyond its threshold. During rollout the captain 
						positioned both thrust levers into reverse but then took 
						the number one thrust lever out of the reverse position 
						and inadvertently moved it to the Take-Off/Go-Around 
						(TOGA) position, while leaving the #2 thrust lever in 
						the full reverse position. Full left rudder and full 
						left brake application did not compensate for the yaw. 
						The airplane continued swerving to the right until 
						exiting the right side of the runway. It crossed the 
						apron east of intersection B8, and experienced the 
						collapse and partial separation of its nose gear strut 
						assembly upon traversing the dirt infield area south of 
						the runway between intersections B9 and B10.
						
						PROBABLE CAUSE: "The captain's failure to maintain 
						directional control and his inadvertent application of 
						asymmetrical engine thrust while attempting to move the 
						#1 thrust lever out of reverse. A factor in the accident 
						was the crew's inadequate coordination and crew resource 
						management."  |  from
			
			this link | 
		
			| 
				
					| 
						
							Narrative:
						Flight PR 137 was a regular scheduled 
						passenger flight and departed Manila for Bacolod at 
						18:40. The airplane departed with the thrust reverser of 
						engine nr.1 inoperative.
								| Date: | 22 MAR 1998 |  
								| Time: | 19:41 |  
								| Type: | Airbus A.320-214 |  
								| Operator: | Philippine Air Lines |  
								| Registration: | RP-C3222 |  
								| C/n / msn: | 708 |  
								| First flight: | 1997 |  
								| Total airframe hrs: | 1224.0 |  
								| Cycles: | 1070.0 |  
								| Engines: | 2 CFMI CFM56-5B4 |  
								| Crew: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 6 |  
								| Passengers: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 124 |  
								| Total: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 130 |  
								| Ground casualties: | Fatalities: 3 |  
								| Airplane damage: | Written off |  
								| Location: | Bacolod Airport (BCD) (Philippines)  |  
								| Phase: | Landing |  
								| Nature: | Domestic Scheduled Passenger |  
								| Departure airport: | Manila International Airport (MNL/RPLL), 
								Philippines |  
								| Destination airport: | Bacolod Airport (BCD/RPVB), Philippines |  
								| Flightnumber: | 137 |  At 19:20, PR137 called Bacolod Approach Control and 
						reported passing FL260 and 55 DME to Bacolod . The crew 
						then requested landing instructions and was instructed 
						to descend to FL90 after passing Iloilo and descend to 
						3,000 ft for a VOR runway 04 approach. Wind was 030° at 
						08 kts, altimeter 1014 mbs, transition level at FL60 and 
						temperature at 28°C .At 19:28, the flight requested to 
						intercept the final approach to runway 04 and Approach 
						Control replied "PR 137 visual approach on final" . At 
						19:37, Bacolod Tower cleared the flight to land at 
						runway 04 and the clearance was acknowledged by the 
						pilot.
 The approach was flown with the Autothrust system 
						engaged in SPEED mode. The thrust lever of engine no.1 
						was left in Climb detent. Upon touchdown the first 
						officer called out "no spoilers, no reverse, no decel". 
						Engine no.2 was set to full reverse thrust after 
						touchdown, but the engine no .1 thrust lever was not 
						retarded to idle and remained in the climb power 
						position. Consequently, the spoilers did not deploy.
 Because one engine was set to reverse, the autothrust 
						system automatically disengaged. With the autothrust 
						disengaged, nr.1 engine thrust increased to climb 
						thrust. Due to the asymmetrical thrust condition, the 
						A320 ran off the right side of the runway. At this 
						speed, rudder and nosewheel steering are ineffective. 
						Engine no.2 was moved out of reverse up to more than 70 
						percent N1 and the airplane swerved back onto the 
						runway. The A320 continued past the runway end. The 
						aircraft hit the airport perimeter fence and then jumped 
						over a small river. It continued to slice through a 
						hallow block fence where it went through several 
						clusters of shanties and trees. No fire ensued after the 
						crash.
						
						PROBABLE CAUSE:
  "The probable cause of this accident was 
						the inability of the pilot flying to assess properly the 
						situational condition of the aircraft immediately upon 
						touch down with No. 1 engine reverse inoperative, 
						thereby causing an adverse flight condition of extreme 
						differential power application during the landing roll 
						resulting in runway excursion and finally an overshoot. 
						Contributory to this accident is the apparent lack of 
						technical systems knowledge and lack of appreciation of 
						the disastrous effects of misinterpreting provisions and 
						requirements of a Minimum Equipment List (MEL).  |  from
			
			this link | 
		
			| Similar 
			Transasia A320 mishap: 
 
 
				Runway Overrun During Landing On Taipei Sungshan AirportOctober 18, 2004TRANSASIA AIRWAYS FLIGHT 536
 A320-232, B-22310
 
 http://www.asc.gov.tw/acd_files/164-c1contupload.pdf
 | 
		
			| 
			
			Reference the thrust levers on the Bus...it's not a single piece, it consists of 2 things.
 1. The thrust lever
 2. Reverse latching levers.
 
 To actuate thrust reverse:
 Thrust lever to idle
 pull the reverse latching levers... this actuates idle reverse
 Pull thrust lever to the rear for more reverse thrust.
 
 Requires both main landing gears to be compressed for a full On The 
			Ground detection, AND
 A thrust reverse signal fed through at least one of the Spoiler 
			Elevator Computer. The signal from the SEC opens the reversers 
			hydraulic shut off valve to prevent its deployment without this 
			signal.
 
 Actuation of reversers will have FADEC commanding IDLE. Once IDLE is 
			attained, it will go to idle reverse, complete the reverser sleeves 
			deployment before going beyond idle reverse.
 If we 
			go with a one reverser inop scenario, it's actually pretty simple.
 Sequence:
 1. Pilot selects Reversers on 1 or both engines
 2. Pilot then selects a go-around.
 
 On the reverser actuation, refer to the above. BUT, 1 engine remains 
			on forward idle.
 On go-round selection:
 the engine with the reverse inop will go straight to TOGA
 the engine with the operating reverser will:
 1. Select thrust to TOGA and stow the reverser sleeves.
 2. Idle Thrust Protection will immediately kick in because no 
			reverse thrust is selected and the sleeves are still in transition 
			to stow.
 3. Idle thrust will remain on the engine despite TOGA power 
			selection until no HYD pressure is detected downstream of the Hyd 
			Control unit on the reverser.
 
 This theoretically should only take moments, but ideally, one should 
			select idle, check the reversers have been stowed and no pressure is 
			detected downstream of the reverser HCU (Reversers stowed indicated 
			on the ECAM), then go to TOGA. However, in emergencies, this should 
			not be a problem because the FADEC and reverser mechanism should 
			take care of it... however, the delay even if only for a second, 
			could result in asymmetrical thrust.
 
 This is why on Boeings (and Buses), it is not recommended to 
			go-around after reversers have been deployed because, in the haste 
			of things, the pilot could select TOGA before the reversers are 
			stowed and HYD Press gone to zero, which puts a risk on the engine 
			at TOGA on accidental reverse deployment due to hyd pressure being 
			present downstream of the reverser control unit. Should it be 
			necessary, the safest way is to wait and confirm on the engine 
			instruments that the reversers have been stowed prior to going to 
			TOGA, both on Bus or Boeing. This is why people and companies have 
			tried to keep it simple, i.e. no go-around after reverser 
			deployment. It's just too risky.
 
			Up 
			to five seconds are required for a reverser to close in the forward 
			thrust position. 
			Add to that another 5-8 
			secs for a spool up to max thrust.
 And this makes interesting reading...
 http://www.smartcockpit.com/data/pdf...yingtechnique/Slippery_Runways.pdf
 | 
		
			| 
			now......on the Subject of the Wheelbraking
			Anomalies Experienced by the Airbus family 
			(The Cause of the Go-Round 
			Decision??) On the A320 there is a recall drill (not on ECAM) for 'Loss of 
			Braking'? It resulted from the A320 overrun accident at Ibiza
			(link). 
			It relates to no-notice BSCU failure (Brakes, Steering and Control 
			Unit) and requires prompt recall action by the crew.....
			as there's nil braking available.....
 It requires quickly switching the A/Skid & N/W Strg switch off and 
			then manually braking with max 1000psi pressure.
			(see page 50/105 at 
			
			the above link). 
			However, as the toe-brakes on the rudder pedals don't go flat to the 
			floor in this case (under manual braking) and the deceleration due 
			to two-engine reverse approximates the retardation from a low 
			autobrake setting, it's not always clear, early on, that braking has 
			failed.
 
 If that A/Skid & N/W Strg switch cycling proved unsuccessful, then 
			you were supposed to use short and successive applications of the 
			park brake.
 
 It became a published procedure, so I presume that it has happened 
			to the extent that Airbus had to devise a new FCOM procedure.
 
				
					
						| In the event of a failure on a short slippery 
						runway, determining the cause for the lack of braking 
						may well be very difficult in the heat of the moment, 
						no? The lack of 
						braking/ restricted choices may force an otherwise 
						desperate go-round decision, ....thus explaining the TAM 
						A320 outcome. 
						
						
						but...."WARNING 
						(A320 FCOM)
 Do not attempt a go around once the aircraft is 
						on the runway
 and reverse thrust is initiated. Up to five seconds are 
						required
 for a reverser to close in the forward thrust position. 
						Also, there
 is a possibility that the reverser will not stow in the 
						forward thrust
 position during a go around attempt."
 |  | 
		
			| 1.  For BSCU 
			Problems on 777 and Airbus (see pg 7 of
			this 
			link) 
			
			continuing in 2007  (items 318 to 322 inclusive) and
			
			this link  (items 206 thru 208) "As our BSCU components continue to 
			age, we are seeing a higher frequency of BSCU Channel Faults (X) 
			almost exclusively on the older style Conventional BSCU PN 
			C202163382D32. In most cases 86% of the time, these faults are 
			simply corrected by cycling the A/SKD and N/W STRG switches off, 
			then on, or with a computer/circuit breaker reset."     | 
		
			| 
				
				
					
						| The BSCU performs a 
						functional test on selection of Landing Gear Down, 
						... The BSCU then sends current momentarily 
						to the NSVs and monitors the pressure ... findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0UBT/is_8_19/ai_n11844069/pg_3 
						- 29k - 
						
						Cached -
						
						Similar pages
 |  
				
				
				
					
						| The BSCU is a 
						two-channel computer that controls anti-skid and 
						autobrake ... Alternate braking without anti-skid 
						(pedal-braking due to BSCU failure or ... findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0UBT/is_8_19/ai_n11844069 
						- 27k - 
						
						Cached -
						
						Similar pages
 |  | 
		
			| Note also the (likely) similar (to TAM Flight JJ3054) 03 Aug 2003 
			accident to A320 regn C-FTDF 
			at 
			http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/C-FTDF.pdf "Analysis 
			showed that it took 10 to 13 seconds for the commander to recognise 
			the lack of pedal braking and 
			there was no overt warning from the ECAM of the malfunction of the 
			BSCU. Two safety recommendations were 
			made to the aircraft manufacturer regarding improved warnings and crew procedures." (pg 1 of 
			8) 
				
					
						| Data from C-FTDF's FDR was analysed by 
						the aircraft manufacturer and the analysis agreed with 
						the sequence of events reported by the 
						pilots. On the approach, data was lost from the BSCU (as indicated by the brake pedal position 
						transducers and 'autobrake fault' parameter) for a 
						period starting 53 seconds before touchdown, 
						corresponding to the airborne cycling of the A/SKID
						& 
						N/W STRNG switch at about 
						1,000 feet. The changes at about this time in the 
						discrete autobrake parameters indicate that the cycling of 
						the switch resulted in a change of active channel in the 
						BSCU 
						and the loss of autobrake arming. The FDR traces showed that, after the 
						touchdown, the spoilers extended in about two seconds 
						and reverse thrust was initiated at the same 
						time. The deceleration rose to 0.18g in the six seconds 
						after touchdown, due to the spoilers and idle 
						reverse thrust, but, by the time the pilot brake pedal 
						inputs started (eight seconds after touchdown), 
						the rate of deceleration was reducing. The brake pedals were progressively applied over a period 
						of 10 seconds to maximum and back to zero deflection 
						over the next three seconds. 
						This confirms that pedal braking 
						was not effective, even at large deflections. The decline in deceleration rate was 
						arrested 19 seconds after touchdown with the application 
						of maximum reverse thrust by the crew, 
						which alone resulted in the deceleration rate reaching 
						0.19g. Evidence of pedal braking was apparent 
						28 seconds after touchdown, with a rapid rise in 
						longitudinal deceleration to about 0.4g, punctuated 
						by three sharp 'spikes', probably corresponding to the 
						rupture of the three mainwheel tyres. The 
						aircraft came to rest 50 seconds after touchdown. Data was again lost from the BSCU for a 
						period starting 23 seconds after touchdown (at about 78 
						kt ground speed), consistent with the 
						crew's reported cycling, and then turning off, the
						A/SKID
						& N/W STRNG switch.
						Effective pedal braking was 
						apparent at 28 seconds after touchdown, five seconds later.
						Note that the TAM crew 
						would have applied power to go round by this elapsed 
						time. A simple analysis of the available FDR 
						traces by the AAIB indicated that the runway distance covered during the 10 seconds of the 
						gradual initial application of pedal braking was some 590 metres. The analysis also showed 
						that this would have been reduced if full reverse thrust 
						had been selected with the initial 
						application of pedal braking. By comparison, the cycling 
						of the A/SKID & 
						N/W STRNG
						switch covered about 120 metres of runway, as it 
						occurred over a much shorter period and at a lower ground speed. The records of 
						typical UK operators of A319/320/321 aircraft indicate 
						that 'loss of braking' events immediately 
						following touchdown are infrequent. However, over a 
						three-year period one UK operator of A320 
						aircraft reported a total of five ASRs (Air Safety 
						Reports) featuring apparent failure of the 
						braking system during landings. These incidents are 
						potentially very hazardous, as shown in the 
						report into the accident to a UK-registered Airbus 
						A320-212, G-UKLL, at Ibiza Airport Safety Recommendation 2004-83 It is recommended that Airbus amend the 
						Flight Crew Operating Manuals, and related material, to advise 
						application of maximum reverse thrust as soon as a loss 
						of braking performance is suspected following touchdown, rather than delay 
						the application whilst awaiting confirmation that no 
						braking is available. 
 
						Applicable 
						Airworthiness Directive 
						AD 96-04-06 
						( 1996 ) (link) 
						(and AD 93-15-05  of 1993 -
						
						link)  "requires replacement of the 
						relays in the forward electronics rack of the braking 
						system of the landing gear with new relays. This 
						amendment is prompted by reports of loss of the systems 
						of the braking/steering control unit (BSCU) on these 
						airplanes due to electrical overvoltage of the relays. 
						The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent 
						such electrical overvoltage of the relays, which could 
						result in the loss of the BSCU systems, and subsequent 
						loss of the antiskid functions and nose wheel steering 
						of the airplane."  Airbus General Emergency AD
						(AD 2002-06-53) at
						
						link  refers to induced general computer failures 
						that include the loss of BSCU functions. |  | 
		
			| Note 
			that the shaky old BSCU also features in the A320 family's 90 degree 
			cocked off nosewheel landings. (
			
			link ) "An event where an A320 landed with the Nose Landing 
			Gear (NLG) wheels rotated at 90 degrees to the aircraft centerline 
			was recently reported. Investigation showed that the upper support 
			of the NLG shock absorber was damaged and the anti-rotation lugs 
			were ruptured. This led the nose wheels to loose their centered 
			position reference normally ensured by the shock-absorber cams. The 
			Braking and Steering Control Unit (BSCU) had logged a steering 
			system fault, because hydraulic power was not available at the time 
			of steering system checks, therefore the BSCU was not able to 
			proceed with the re-centering of the wheels. To prevent reoccurrence of landings with NLG turned 
			90 degrees, AD F-2005-191 that dealt with the same subject, rendered 
			mandatory an operational procedure and maintenance actions."   | 
		
			| The BSCU problem has also been experienced on 
			Airbus A330 and A340  (link 
			to applicable AD 98-03-04 ) | 
		
			| Flash on the Video --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 A comment on the flash visible from the left side of the aircraft on
			
			the video just before it disappears from view...
 One hypothesis: Reverse thrust was selected on Eng 
			1 (eng 2 rev thrust was deactivated). Pilots realized they would not 
			be able to stop the aircraft and, contrary to the recommendations of 
			the FCOM (Flight Crew Operating Manual) to always execute a full 
			stop once reverse thrust (TR) is selected, initiated a go-around by 
			pushing the thrust levers to TOGA. An engine going from full rev to 
			full forward thrust could possibly suffer a compressor stall while 
			the reverser doors are closing, causing the flash we see in the 
			video.
 Of course, they may have considered it was safer to try to get 
			airborne again... if they had experienced a BSCU-induced 
			wheel-braking failure. The problem may
			
			then have become the same thrust asymmetry of  the accidents 
			of registrations: N635AW and F-OGYP (the two incidents in cells 2 
			and 3 above).
 - 17:03 LT - GOL B 737-800 lands at CGH and reports "slippery 
			runway"- 17:04 LT - INFRAERO, local airport manager, closes the airport for 
			landing and takeoff ops. INFRAERO engineers measures the standing 
			water: 0,6 mm.
 - 17:30 LT - Airport returns to normal ops.
 - 18:50 LT - PR-MBK lands at CGH, overruns and crashes.
 
 Remark: Between 1730 and 1850, 40 aircraft (the majority of 
			them were airliners - B 737 and A319/320) landed at CGH and no 
			problem was reported. This increases the likelihood of it having 
			been attributable to a technical malfunction on TAM's Flt JJ3054. 
			Judging by the water spray seen on the video, it would appear that 
			its #1 Rev was deployed and probably at full thrust. If a go around 
			was attempted after TR deployment on #1, which is highly not 
			recommended of course, the right engine would spool immediately and 
			the left would have to come out of reverse and then start to spool 
			up well after the right engine. The results of the thrust asymmetry 
			would probably follow the tracking on the Google earth picture 
			posted below which is a faithful illustration of what the security 
			cameras showed.
 
				
					|  | 
						Alternatively 
						The flash at the end of the video
					 
 
						might have been a tire burst, LH engine ingesting fence 
						bits or, more likely, a compressor stall due to TOGA 
						power being applied rapidly while the LH engine's 
						reversers was still stowing.
 Part of the aircraft did graze a car on the road below.
   |  TAM has now put its A320 MEL on their public website, probably in 
			response to the press coverage of the T/R issue 
 http://www.taminforma.com.br/noticia.aspx?id=1497
 | 
		
			|  |