FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

British Airways Flight BA209

26 Dec 2006 · Miami, FL, United States

Boeing 747-436 · Incident: on ground/water collision with object while taxiing

From London Heathrow Airport (EGLL) to Miami International Airport (KMIA)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
MIA07IA031
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
Incident
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

Boeing 747-436

Aircraft type
Boeing 747
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
G-BNLM
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From London Heathrow Airport (EGLL), LondonTo Miami International Airport (KMIA), Miami, FL
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 129: Foreign
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
Taxi · from runway
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
On ground/water collision with object
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
None

Cause areas

  • Flightcrew › Visual lookout, inadequate

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

NTSB narrative

After a normal landing on runway 30, a runway the flightcrew had not previously landed on at night, the flightcrew taxied the airplane to the end of the runway, intending to depart the runway at the last taxiway. The flightcrew passed the taxiway exit, overran the departure threshold of runway 30, and struck two lights associated with the approach lighting system for runway 12, breaking the lights off at their bases. The airplane was not damaged, and, after being towed from the overrun area, taxied to the gate under its own power.

The flightcrew stated to investigators that they observed the runway centerline lights initially alternated red and white and then became all red as they taxied the airplane toward the runway threshold. They stated that they were looking for a right turn to vacate the runway but did not see any green lead-off lights leading to the taxiway. They further stated that they observed a line of red lights about 50 meters (about 160 feet) in front of the airplane, which they thought were part of the stop bar indicating the runway threshold. The first officer started to turn off the runway using the blue taxiway edge lights as a guide, but immediately stopped the airplane when both he and the captain realized the light pattern was not as expected. The investigation revealed that the red lights that the flightcrew observed were obstruction lights mounted on top of an Instrument Landing System localizer antenna, approximately 500 feet beyond the runway threshold. The actual runway threshold was marked with eight red lights, consisting of four lights extending out from each side of the runway edge.

The lighting, signage, and airfield markings of runway 30 were operational and in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) specifications; however, the flightcrew did not correctly utilize or interpret these cues to determine their exact location during taxi. The runway 30 centerline lights changed from all white to alternating red and white lights beginning 3,000 feet from the runway threshold and became all red lights beginning 1,000 feet from the runway threshold. The runway edge lights changed from white to amber 2,000 feet from the runway threshold and remained amber until the end of the runway. On the left side of the runway, "distance remaining" signs were installed at 4,000 feet, 2,000 feet, and 1,000 feet before the runway threshold. Approximately 500 feet before the runway threshold, on the right side of the runway, a taxiway sign was installed, indicating "Q" with an arrow pointing to the right. Approximately 75 feet before the runway threshold, the centerline lights of Taxiway Q began at the runway edge and extended perpendicular to and away from the runway. Additionally, twelve parallel white bars were painted along the width of the runway surface to mark the threshold and yellow chevrons were painted on the blast pad beyond the runway threshold to indicate unusable pavement.

FAA advisory material for new runway threshold lighting installations and for reconstruction of existing installations recommends that threshold lights extend from the runway edge inboard toward the center of the runway, and not outboard like those on the incident runway; however, existing installations, such as those on the incident runway, were permitted by the FAA. The taxiway at the end of the runway did not have taxiway lead off lights extending to the center of the runway, but the taxiway did have centerline lights beginning at the runway edge, per FAA requirements. Although the flightcrew said they were confused by the location of the runway threshold lights, they had numerous other indications available to identify their position on the runway, all of which were in compliance with FAA guidance. Each of these indications would have been visible from the cockpit and are intended to help the flightcrew navigate without incident. However, the flightcrew did not heed the numerous lighting, signage, and airfield markings for runway 30, and instead focused on lights that were located well beyond the runway threshold to the exclusion of all other indications.

Probable cause

The flightcrew's misinterpretation of available lighting, signage, and airfield marking cues during taxi.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record MIA07IA031
Event ID
20061227X01849
Case number
MIA07IA031
Dataset
historical-pre2008
Source SHA-256
89e2df6d848e7ab3b42e7d7c7a03ff403303057a26ca04c95b3ea67201c3ce74
Source notes (5)
  • 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: investigation status, coordinates, damage. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date, which is the same as the UTC date the NTSB stores.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: a8b8c21a1d45eb7715922476e30690898c878f56530e1538578660a06901280c; retrieved 2026-09-18T14:48:28.179Z.
  • The NTSB's operator name is blank for G-BNLM; the operator shown is the name the NTSB's other records give its FAA operator code, BRAF.