FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

Flight 1255 · Airbus Industrie A300-600F

10 Jun 2002 · El Paso, TX, United States

Airbus Industrie A300-600F · Accident: dragged wing, rotor, pod, float or tail/skid during takeoff

From El Paso International Airport (KELP) to Frederick W. Smith International Airport (KMEM)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
FTW02LA198
Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
Accident
InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
Completed
API-reported fatalities
0 · all aircraft and ground
Ground fatalities
Unknown
OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
Airline
WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
Visual Meteorological Cond

Airbus Industrie A300-600F

Aircraft type
Airbus A300
Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N681FE
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From El Paso International Airport (KELP), El Paso, TXTo Frederick W. Smith International Airport (KMEM), Memphis, TN
Aircraft age
Not recorded
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Part 121: Air Carrier
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Takeoff
First occurrenceThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
Dragged wing, rotor, pod, float or tail/skid
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Substantial

Cause areas

  • Flightcrew › Airspeed(vr), not obtained

Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The flight crew briefed the departure, completed the taxi-out and pre-departure checklist and entered the V-speeds (V1 was 139 knots and Vr was approximately 143 knots) into the flight management system (FMS) with both crewmember's primary flight display (PFD) displaying the V-speeds with the standard blue lines and no discrepancies noted. The captain entered the V2 speed (approximately 143 knots) into the flight control computer in the glare shield and entered 250 knots for the extended speed to 10,000 feet msl. The first officer did not recall being distracted during the checklist or before takeoff procedures. The flight crew requested and was cleared for departure on runway 04. The PF aligned the airplane on the runway and applied standard take-off power. The flight instruments were cross-checked at 80 knots and the V-speeds were correctly displayed on the PFD. The first officer checked the engine diagnostic page to observe the #2 engine vibrations. According to the first officer, when he looked back at the PFD, the V-speeds were not displayed, and V2 had reset to 100 knots. The first officer did not look at the speed index (correct raw speed data) on the left side of the PFD. The first officer called V1 rotate, and the captain responded to an aircraft pitch of approximately 12 degrees. The captain realized the airplane was not climbing or accelerating properly. The first officer realized the airspeed was approximately 120-125 knots (below V2) and called for the captain to lower the nose of the airplane. The captain lowered the nose, and executed a rejected take-off by pulling the throttles to idle. The flight control computer automatically applied maximum auto brakes, the airplane slowed, and the captain taxied the airplane off the runway. Neither flight crewmember recalled the aft end of the airplane strike the runway. The flight crew deplaned, entered the discrepancy "rejected T/O due to FMS speeds dumping and blue A/S line rolling back to 100. Rejected @ 120 knots Raw data still indicated properly." in the Aircraft Maintenance Log (AML) and departed the airport. The flight release weight and balance indicated the takeoff gross weight was 297,184 pounds. The takeoff center of gravity was 24.9. The DFDR revealed the following (1) The airplane became airborne for about 4 seconds. During the takeoff roll, pitch attitude reached 13.4 degrees airplane nose up with control column position recorded as 7.1 degree aft and elevator position recorded as 16.6 degree trailing edge up. (2) Pitch attitude decreased and was approximately 6 degrees upon touchdown of the left and right main landing gear, at which time the airplane experienced a vertical acceleration of 1.844 g's. (3) Airspeed was recorded as 114 knots when the nose gear initially left the ground. Airspeed continued to increase and was recorded as 131 knots. Following touchdown of the nose landing gear, airspeed reached its maximum recorded value of 138 knots. (4) Engine 1 and engine 2 thrust reversers were briefly unlocked before both were unlocked again and remained in that state. (5) Longitudinal acceleration reached -0.584 g's and lateral acceleration reached -0.151 g's during the rejected takeoff sequence. According to the operator's representative, the "test results for the Flight Control Computer, Flight Management Computer, Flight Warning Computer, ECAM, Flight Augmentation Computer, and Signal Generator Unit found no faults. Examination of the aircraft found no anomalies that would have prevented it from operating per design prior to the tail strike.

Probable cause

The flight crew's failure to obtain the Vr speed prior to rotation which resulted in insufficient lift and the subsequent tail strike.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record FTW02LA198
Event ID
20020702X01033
Case number
FTW02LA198
Dataset
historical-pre2008
Source SHA-256
89e2df6d848e7ab3b42e7d7c7a03ff403303057a26ca04c95b3ea67201c3ce74
Source notes (4)
  • Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
  • Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: local date, investigation status, coordinates. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2002-06-11.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: 7dc6b06460a130a83915dbe11e38dcc23b478ceb346b7fc940dde443e0c46ba9; retrieved 2026-09-18T16:01:54.440Z.