Definition
A hard landing is a landing that meets the applicable aircraft manufacturer's criteria for a high-load or hard-landing event and may require a defined maintenance inspection. A firm touchdown, passenger discomfort, a high cockpit vertical-speed indication, or a single recorded g peak is not by itself a universal definition.
Why it matters
Loads beyond the assumptions for normal operation can affect landing gear, attachments, structure, systems, or tyres. Prompt flight-crew reporting protects the inspection barrier; validated FDM can help find unreported events and operational trends, but it does not replace the aircraft maintenance manual or engineering assessment.
Questions that turn reading into a defensible review
A strong review separates the event description, possible precursors, recorded evidence, approved criteria, and the final safety decision.
What exactly is being examined?
A hard landing is a landing that meets the applicable aircraft manufacturer's criteria for a high-load or hard-landing event and may require a defined maintenance inspection. A firm touchdown, passenger discomfort, a high cockpit vertical-speed indication, or a single recorded g peak is not by itself a universal definition.
Which conditions could build the exposure?
High rate of descent or late flare after an unstable or high-energy approach; Abrupt flare correction, premature thrust reduction, or reduced lift close to touchdown.
What evidence would strengthen the picture?
Peak and time history of normal acceleration around each main-gear touchdown Validated vertical-velocity source at touchdown, with its sampling and filtering documented
What must remain authoritative?
Current approved aircraft data, operator procedures, investigation findings, and the source document’s own scope control any operational conclusion.
Timeline, aircraft state, relationships, and recurrence
Normal acceleration, Radio altitude, Vertical speed, Calibrated airspeed, Pitch attitude, Roll angle, Engine thrust, Landing gear status can contribute to a synchronized event picture when their mappings, units, sampling, and flight-phase logic are validated.
Cause, intent, compliance, and technical disposition
An FDM alert or pattern is not by itself a causal finding, judgement of individual performance, regulatory conclusion, or aircraft maintenance and airworthiness determination.
Reports, approved criteria, context, and authoritative evidence
Combine the recorded picture with applicable procedures, crew and operational reports, weather or airport information, technical evidence, and the linked official publications and investigation sources.
From touchdown signal to safe release
The safe process combines human reporting, validated data, and controlling maintenance instructions; no single trace makes the release decision.
Common causes and precursors
- →
High rate of descent or late flare after an unstable or high-energy approach
- →
Abrupt flare correction, premature thrust reduction, or reduced lift close to touchdown
- →
Gust, downdraft, windshear, crosswind control input, or rapid runway-relative sink change
- →
Bounce followed by an inappropriate push-over or poorly managed rejected landing
- →
Abnormal configuration, system effect, overweight landing, or degraded handling qualities
- →
Visual illusion, runway slope, fatigue, workload, or weak monitoring and callouts
Operational risks
- R1
Landing-gear, tyre, wheel, nacelle, or airframe damage
- R2
Secondary bounce, nose-gear overload, tail strike, wingtip strike, or runway excursion
- R3
Latent damage if the event is not entered in the technical log and inspected
- R4
Unnecessary disruption if noisy data is treated as an engineering verdict
- R5
Normalization of unstable approaches or excessive touchdown energy
Guidance themes
These are cross-source themes for orientation. Apply only the current, approved material for the aircraft and operation.
- Flight crew: follow the applicable abnormal-event and reporting procedure; record the best available observations even if no automatic load report appears.
- Maintenance: use the current aircraft maintenance manual and any manufacturer/engineering process to classify the event and select inspection tasks.
- Safety/FDM: validate sensor source, polarity, sample rate, filtering, timestamp alignment, air/ground logic, and event segmentation before interpreting a trace.
- Analysts: review normal acceleration with vertical speed, pitch, roll, speed, radio altitude, gear ground-state, weight, wind, and bounce sequence.
- Operators: set alert thresholds by aircraft variant and validated programme logic; a detection threshold is not automatically a structural limit.
- Everyone: preserve a just, reporting-positive response so suspected events are surfaced early.
Safety actions to consider
Make suspected high-load reporting simple, prompt, and non-punitive
Publish an aircraft-specific workflow from crew report to maintenance release
Validate FDM detection against known maintenance-classified events and false positives
Review precursor trends such as unstable approach, high sink, bounce, excess bank, and late go-around
Use recurrent scenarios for bounce recovery and crosswind/gust management
Trend corrective-action effectiveness rather than merely counting events
Parameters that help explain the event
A useful event picture comes from signal relationships—not a single exceedance or a generic threshold.
Normal acceleration
A short peak may support detection and engineering review of a suspected high-load landing, but recorder sampling, filtering, sensor location, weight, and aircraft response all affect interpretation.
Open parameter guide ↗ftRadio altitude
Radio altitude provides the low-height reference needed to align approach gates, flare, touchdown, warning, and go-around events.
Open parameter guide ↗ft/min or m/sVertical speed
It helps describe energy management, approach stability, flare development, and the severity context of a touchdown.
Open parameter guide ↗ktCalibrated airspeed
Speed relative to the applicable target and configuration is central to energy management, approach stability, runway performance, and stall margin.
Open parameter guide ↗degPitch attitude
Pitch shows rotation, flare, stall response, and potential tail-clearance context when combined with gear geometry and radio altitude.
Open parameter guide ↗degRoll angle
Near the runway, roll angle affects wingtip or engine clearance, crosswind alignment, touchdown sequence, and lateral control margins.
Open parameter guide ↗% / ratio / aircraft-specificEngine thrust
Thrust is a primary part of energy control and is essential for understanding approach corrections, takeoff, go-around, and engine malfunctions.
Open parameter guide ↗discreteLanding gear status
Gear and weight-on-wheels transitions anchor takeoff, touchdown, bounce, go-around, braking, spoiler, and reverser logic.
Open parameter guide ↗Recommended monitoring questions
Peak and time history of normal acceleration around each main-gear touchdown
Validated vertical-velocity source at touchdown, with its sampling and filtering documented
Radio-altitude and weight-on-wheels transitions to distinguish flare, touchdown, and bounce
Pitch, pitch rate, roll angle, and control inputs for attitude and clearance context
Calibrated airspeed and target-speed deviation through the approach and flare
Engine thrust and configuration to understand energy control
Repeat-event rates by aircraft, airport, runway, weather, and approach type—using exposure and privacy controls
Cases that add context
ASIP provides a concise learning index. The investigation authority report remains the definitive source.
Editor-reviewed starting points
These records include a deeper ASIP editorial review. Continue to the full evidence index below for direct matches and broader manufacturer, regulator, and investigation reading.
AC 120-82 — Flight Operational Quality Assurance
Active FAA guidance describes one acceptable way to establish a voluntary FOQA programme using de-identified aggregate flight data to identify and reduce operational risk.
Official sourceCAP 739 — Flight Data Monitoring, Second Edition
CAP 739 presents FDM as the systematic, proactive use of routine digital flight data within a non-punitive, just safety culture.
Official sourceHigh Load Event Reporting
The Airbus Safety First article explains why a pilot report remains central after a suspected high-load event and how recorded reports and analysis tools can support the applicable maintenance process.
Official sourceTitle or indexed metadata explicitly matches this topic.
Related collection material for adjacent systems, phases, and defenses.
Manufacturer, regulator, investigation, and safety-organization sources.
Where the reading comes from
71 source records
Official links · no copied report files71 source records match the current evidence filters.
High Load Event Reporting
The Airbus Safety First article explains why a pilot report remains central after a suspected high-load event and how recorded reports and analysis tools can support the applicable maintenance process.
Open official sourceA Focus on the Landing Flare
Official Airbus Safety First material indexed for approach and landing. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceHard Landing, a Case Study for Crews and Maintenance Personnel
Official Airbus Safety First material indexed for approach and landing and maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 24001 — Boeing 737-900ER Mid-Cabin Door Plug Inspection
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for maintenance and cabin and cargo. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 23001 — Potential Damage to Nose Landing Gear (NLG) by Improper Towing Procedures of the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Regional Jet (MHIRJ) (formerly Bombardier) CL-600-2B19, CL-600-2C10 and CL-600-2D24 Airplanes
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and ground operations. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 23004 — Boeing Multi Operator Message (MOM); MOM-MOM-23-0179-01B and Erroneous Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) Calculation from Boeing Performance Engineer's Tool (PET) Reporters
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for takeoff and maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 22001 — SAFO 22001, Recommended Procedures for Operators of Boeing DC-9/MD-80 Series and B717 Model Airplanes When Wind/Ground Gusts Meet or Exceed Criteria Specified in the Applicable Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM)
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for weather and maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 22002 — SAFO 22002, Boeing’s Onboard Performance Tool (OPT) v4.70 for iOS Devices
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 21003 — SAFO 21003, Inspection of Lavatory Fire Extinguishing Bottles on Aircraft Parked or Stored for a Prolonged Period of Time in a High-Temperature Environment
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for fire and smoke and maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 21004 — SAFO 21004, Air Traffic Control (ATC) Notification and Pilot Awareness When Conducting an Instrument Landing System (ILS) Autoland Procedure
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and human factors. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 20010 — SAFO 20010, Fraudulent Documentation and Possible Improper Maintenance on Accessories/Articles by a Previous Employee of Aviatronics, LLC , Miami Lakes, Florida
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 19005 — SAFO 19005, Possible Improper Maintenance by Repair Station Xtra Aerospace, LLC
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 18006 — SAFO 18006, Improper Maintenance Performed on Aircraft Accessories/Articles by Southern Atlanta Aerospace, LLC
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for maintenance. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 18009 — SAFO 18009, Risk of Runway Number Transposition Leading to a possible "Runway Overrun" During Takeoff at San Francisco International Airport ( SFO )
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and takeoff. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 17011 — SAFO 17011, Runway Status Lights ( RWSL )
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and runway safety. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 17012 — SAFO 17012, High Collision Risk During Runway Crossing
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and runway safety. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 16008 — SAFO 16008, Reducing the Risk of Runway Excursions During Takeoff
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and takeoff. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceSAFO 16009 — SAFO 16009, Runway Assessment and Condition Reporting, Effective October 1, 2016
Official U.S. Federal Aviation Administration material indexed for approach and landing and runway safety. Open the publisher source for the complete document, scope, and current status.
Open official sourceLessons learned
1A smooth landing is not the safety objective; a controlled touchdown in the intended zone is.
2The first safety barrier after a suspected event is an accurate crew report.
3No single generic g or ft/min value safely classifies every aircraft and condition.
4FDM provides operational context; maintenance and engineering instructions determine airworthiness action.