LOOK AT what happened at 15 seconds…FINALLY the correct action, then changed his mind….the final nail in the coffin of this unstable approach.
NTSB INVESTIGATOR-IN-CHARGE CHIHOON SHIN RELEASES PRELIMINARY FDR DATA FOR FINAL 30 SEC. OF AMAZON 767 LANDING OVERRUN AT MIAMI.
All timings are before the end of the recording:
🕒 30 Secs.
The nose and right main landing gear touch down. Ground speed 158 knots.
🕒23 Secs.
Wheel brakes applied. Ground speed 146 knots
🕒19 Secs.
Left main landing gear touched down.
Ground speed 134 knots.
🕒15 Secs.
The brakes were released at 120 knots while throttles were advanced to TOGA power.
🕒11 Secs.
Throttles were reduced to idle and the brakes were reapplied at 117 knots. Brakes remained applied and the throttles remained at idle through the end of the recording.
🕒7 Secs.
Recorded lateral, longitudinal and vertical acceleration values changed as ground speed fell to 96 knots.
🕒End of recording.
Final recorded ground speed 65 knots.
⚠️"No indication in the recorded data that speed brakes or thrust reversers were deployed", NTSB Investigator-in-charge Chihoon Shin said.
Sep 9, 2026 · 12:15 PM UTC
6
2
2
10,194
Here’s what a “stable approach” means in simple terms:
CLARIFICATION about the Prime Air crash in Miami:
What is a STABILIZED APPROACH in simple terms?
The approach is NOT stable until all of these criteria are met:
- Flaps are set for landing
- Landing gear is down
- Speed is what was calculated for the flap setting and weight of the plane
- Proper glideslope is flown, typically 3°
- Plane is aligned with the centerline of the runway
- Engines are at the power setting needed to maintain the speed, i.e., the plane is not accelerating or decelerating.
With all of this done, then the pilot flying makes simple corrections, guiding the plane to the runway for landing.
We DON’T have stabilized LANDING criteria, but APPROACH criteria. Safe landings are the result of stabilized approaches.
Stable = BORING. That means the pilot can zoom out and look for threats, rather than be frantically trying to land the plane.
This crew only met TWO of the criteria above: They lowered the gear and they were aligned with the runway.
And the standard practice is to have the approach “stable” by 1000’ above the ground, but on a clear day like this, the engines don’t have to be stable until 500’ above the ground. When conditions are challenging, we will be stable at a much higher altitude, meaning further from the runway.
They both knew the approach was unstable all the way to the runway. This was NOT an ACCIDENT, but a TRAGEDY that shouldn’t have happened.
In foreign countries, these pilots would be arrested and jailed. In the USA, it will definitely be a loss of license, fines, loss of employment and civil lawsuits by the families.
A simple go around at 1000’ or 500’ would’ve done three things: the dead would be alive, the injured would not be injured, and the pilots would still have their careers. They will take this gross negligence to their graves, knowing that all they had to do was fly safe. Instead, they were “mission hackers”, determined to NOT go around for reasons beyond my comprehension.
I’ve been an airline pilot for 36 years. Prior to the airlines, I was in a situation of a captain determined to land, and it literally took me screaming at him to go around for him to snap out of his tunnel vision and climb. Short story, we would’ve run off the end of the runway, but instead the go around was done while still on approach.
13
