FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

Atlantic Southeast Airlines Bombardier Inc CL-600-2B1 incident

11 Jun 2009 · Atlanta, GA, United States

Bombardier Inc CL-600-2B1 · Incident: landing gear collapse

From Columbus Airport (CSG) to Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
ERA09IA338
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

Bombardier Inc CL-600-2B1

Aircraft type
Bombardier CL-600
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
N857AS
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Columbus Airport (CSG), Columbus, GATo Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL), Atlanta, GA
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
Landing · flare/touchdown
Defining eventThe 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
Landing gear collapse
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Minor

Cause areas

  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems
  • Aircraft › Fluids/miscellaneous hardware

Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

While configuring the airplane for landing, the left main landing gear light indicated that it was not down and locked. The flight crew accomplished the landing gear abnormal procedures, including recycling the landing gear once. The left main gear continued to indicate unsafe, and the captain landed the airplane. After touching down on the right main and the nose gear, the captain used right aileron to keep the left wing up as long as possible. The left wing eventually dropped to the runway and the airplane came to a stop at the runway’s left edge. During recovery of the airplane, the left main gear was partially extended, and no physical obstructions were observed that would prevent the gear from extending. Loosening a hydraulic line to the left main gear actuator allowed the gear to fall into the extended and locked position. The airplane was examined and the landing gear was cycled numerous times using the normal and alternate extension methods. The examination failed to duplicate the incident conditions; the gear extended and retracted normally without hesitation or binding. All major components of the main landing gear system, including the left main landing gear, left gear door, hydraulic pumps, valves and actuators were examined at the manufacturers’ facilities. Although some minor anomalies were noted, no evidence was found to explain the failure of the gear to extend. Analysis of fluid from the numbers 2 and 3 hydraulic systems revealed that the fluid exceeded the maximum particle contamination limits. The system 3 sample also contained metallic particles. Hydraulic system 3 powers gear extension and retraction. After the incident, the operator enhanced its maintenance procedures for testing hydraulic fluid to include contamination. The operator also added verbiage to its pilot procedures to further explain that, in certain cases, it is appropriate to make several attempts at normal gear extension and provided more explanation and guidance regarding the use of the back-up (freefall) system.

Probable cause

The failure of the left main landing gear to extend due to high levels of particulate contamination in the hydraulic fluid.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record ERA09IA338
Event ID
20090611X13753
Case number
ERA09IA338
Dataset
full-current
Source SHA-256
5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
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: investigation status. 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: ccd8322cdb986c4ea255e3d977e19dccdc1caed22c6a14507f19385830748807; retrieved 2026-09-15T11:22:43.753Z.