An SAS A320neo’s Bizarrely Hot Approach To Rome

File this one under “huh?!?”

A320neo tries to land at 230 knots without flaps

The Aviation Herald reports on an incident that happened on February 13, 2023. This incident involves Scandinavian Airlines flight SK681 flying from Copenhagen (CPH) to Rome (FCO). The flight was operated by a roughly five year old Airbus A320neo with the registration code EI-SIC.

The 955-mile flight was totally routine, until it was descending for its approach toward runway 16L at Rome’s Fiumicino Airport. The plane descended down to 200 feet above ground level with its gear extended, flaps and slats still retracted, at a speed of 230 knots.

Flightradar24 tracking for the approach to Rome
Flightradar24 tracking for the approach to Rome

Just to be clear, an A320neo’s typical landing speed is 130-140 knots, so the plane was going around 100 knots too fast.

The plane reached an altitude as low as 150 feet before performing a go around. At that point the aircraft climbed to 3,000 feet, and positioned for another approach. Around 10 minutes later, the aircraft landed safely on runway 16L with the flaps, slats, and gear extended

According to the METAR, weather at the time of the approach was quite good. There were no clouds, winds were only five knots, and there was six miles visibility. Furthermore, the pilots didn’t report any issues with the aircraft to air traffic controllers.

Can anyone make sense of this?

We’ve seen a lot of concerning aviation safety incidents lately. However, this one is unique for how darn strange it is:

  • Why would the pilots continue the approach if they’re around 100 knots above the typical landing speed, since that’s not a speed at which you’d attempt to land (short of ditching in a life or death emergency)?
  • How could the pilots forget the flaps? Presumably the Mode 4B “too low, flaps” alarm started going off right around the time the go around was being initiated?

Does anyone want to take a stab at how something like this could even happen? I can kind of see how a lot of the recent incidents could happen, as they may have involved being disoriented, or poor split second decisions. But flight data shows that the entire final approach was being performed way too fast, so why would neither pilot call a go around higher up than a couple of hundred feet?

Bottom line

Continuing the strange series of aviation incidents we’ve seen, an SAS A320neo was within a couple hundred feet of landing in Rome while flying at 230 knots without flaps extended. The aircraft ended up performing a last second go around, and landed safety after a second attempt several minutes later.

Anyone want to take a stab at explaining this situation?

Conversations (22)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Erik Berze Guest

managing aircraft energy is not as simple as slowing down with a car, a lot of factors can impact wether an approach is stabilised or not, such as with ATC shortcuts, weather, etc, which is quite common in Rome.

0
‼ 0
Lars Sveding Guest

Flight radar and www.avherald.com are not official and verified sources. Indicated altitude on FR is not adjusted to actual barometric pressure at the airport. In this case - a high pressure situation which add altitude - reported QNH was 1036 which give approximately another 690 ft to the approach. According most SOP’s an approach shall be discontinued att 1000 ft above ground if not stabilized. It looks to me that this is the case. A go-around performed at 1000 ft require some feet height loss until a climb is established. Runway changes occurs sometimes and not always early enough to be able to configure the aircraft to fulfil the stabilized approach criteria. We have all flown to Rome, haven’t we? Enjoy the weekend.

0
‼ 0
Jorge Guest

Likely a mechanical issue with the flaps. There can be a loss of flight control I f the flaps are deployed asymmetrically. This issue actually happened to me once as a pax on an Alaska Airlines 737: The flaps on one side wouldn’t deploy fully, so the plane landed with them partially retracted, resulting in a higher than normal speed. It caused the ARFF crew to standby and I’m sure it wasn’t fun for the pilots.

0
‼ 0
Pierre Diamond

Something here doesn't click: FCO is not a desert airport served by 1 flight a day: There is a traffic flow with several machines at various stages of approach, like boats following a river behind one another. Any plane flying 100 miles too fast will trigger alarms and air control questions way before the plane itself detects a landing anomaly and shouts "Flaps": This info, if it is not completely erroneous, is AT LEAST extremely incomplete. Most approaches impose a set approach speed or at least "Over x and under y knots". This is so true that in the days of the Aeroflot Ilyushin 86 landing at JFK (1990's), the pilot in command had to turn left and right every few seconds as if he were drunk, in order to increase the distance between himself and the machine immediately ahead. The IL 86 could not fly slowly enough to maintain the distance in the queue.

0
‼ 0
Justin Guest

It’s hilarious how all the sanctimonious lockdown trolls that wanted to tell everyone how to live their lives for 2+ years are now SHOCKED that people are out of practice at their jobs. The horrible effects of these insane lockdowns will take years to unwind.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published