Approach and Landing Accidents

Most professional operators define a stabilized approach with specific criteria. The FAA's AC 120-71, Standard Operating Procedures and Pilot Monitoring Duties for Flight Deck Crewmembers, recommends that operators establish stabilized approach criteria in their SOPs, and the Flight Safety Foundation's Approach-and-Landing Accident Reduction guidance is widely used as a reference. Under those widely adopted criteria, an approach should be stabilized by 1,000 feet above airport elevation in instrument conditions and 500 feet in visual conditions, with the aircraft on the correct flight path, in the landing configuration, at an appropriate speed and sink rate, with only small corrections required. If those conditions are not met, the expected action is a go-around.

Those criteria are useful because they turn judgment into defined gates. They also give an operational review a clear benchmark. The question is not simply whether the approach was unstable. It is whether the crew recognized it, what the operator's procedures required at that point, and why a go-around was not initiated.

Several regulations apply directly. Under 14 CFR 91.175, a pilot may not descend below the decision altitude or minimum descent altitude on an instrument approach unless the aircraft is continuously in a position to descend to a landing at a normal rate using normal maneuvers, and the required visual references are distinctly visible. Under 14 CFR 91.103, preflight action includes runway lengths and takeoff and landing distance data. Part 135 operators are also subject to landing distance and destination airport limitations under Subpart I. FAA AC 91-79B, Aircraft Landing Performance and Runway Excursion Mitigation, addresses landing distance assessments at the time of arrival. These requirements are minimums. Established practice in professional operations typically adds additional margin.

A reconstruction usually starts with recorded flight data, including airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, configuration, and flight path, from the aircraft's recorders or avionics. Air traffic control communications and radar data establish the clearance, sequencing, and any late changes. Weather and runway conditions, including winds, visibility, braking action reports, and runway contamination, define the environment. Aircraft performance data establishes what landing distance was required compared with what was available. And the operator's SOPs, approach briefings, and training records show what the crew was expected to do.

The analysis then moves from the crew's final actions to the conditions that shaped them. A late runway change, a compressed descent, a tailwind component, or schedule pressure can each affect whether an approach becomes stabilized. Individually they may be routine. Their cumulative effect, and whether the crew recognized it, is usually the central operational question. Where the record is incomplete, such as when an aircraft has no flight data recorder, conclusions are limited to what the available evidence supports. The NTSB's findings provide the investigative foundation, and independent analysis explains their operational significance.

When a matter involves an approach, landing, or runway excursion, an early independent review can identify which data and records will show how the final minutes developed. Learn more about AeroVerdict's aviation expert witness services.