Brazil

The right main gear collapsed during takeoff following a structural failure caused by the presence of fatigue cracks that were not detected by the maintenance crew because of poor maintenance. The aircraft already suffered an accident in Guarulhos Airport, causing damages to the right main gear.

Controlled flight into terrain after the crew continued the descent below 2,000 feet until the aircraft impacted ground. The following contributing factors were identified:
- The crew reported his altitude at 2,000 feet while the real altitude of the airplane was 1,300 feet,
- The crew continued the descent until final impact,
- The crew did not react to the GPWS alarm that sounded four times when the aircraft reached the altitude of 400 feet,
- No corrective action was taken by the crew,
- Lack of crew coordination,
- Poor approach planning that led the aircraft descending to a critical altitude,
- Lack of supervision,
- Operational deficiencies.

Failure of the left engine due to fuel exhaustion. The following findings were identified:
- Poor flight preparation,
- Complacency, overconfidence,
- Contempt for published procedures and poor judgment,
- The copilot's licence and medical documents were expired.

Loss of control after landing after the crew selected the power levers on 'ground fine pitch', combined with the failure of the antiskid system due to poor maintenance. The operator was facing enormous financial difficulties which affected the motivation of the maintenance, flight and cabin crew, which was considered as a contributing factor.

Wrong approach configuration on part of the crew who completed an unstabilized approach and landed too far down the runway (about a half way down) at an excessive speed. In such conditions, the aircraft could not be stopped within the remaining distance. The following contributing factors were identified:
- The crew did not make any approach briefing,
- The crew failed to follow the approach checklist,
- The aircraft had deficiencies in maintenance, particularly with regard to the brakes systems,
- The techlogs were out of date,
- Maintenance was periodic but insufficient,
- Although the runway 36 was in use, the captain preferred to land on runway 18,
- The aircraft was unstable on short final and landed too far down the runway, reducing the landing distance available,
- The aircraft' speed upon landing was excessive, preventing the reverse thrust systems to be activated,
- The captain took over control and activated the reverse thrust system on the right engine only,
- Poor crew coordination,
- The crew was operating in a conflict environment after touchdown,
- Poor judgment of the situation,
- Poor flight planning,
- Lack of crew discipline.

It was determined that both engines were running normally at impact and no technical anomalies were found on the aircraft and its equipments. Both pilots were properly licenced and experienced on this type of aircraft. At the time of the accident, weather conditions were poor with CB's, rains falls, severe turbulences, strong winds and probable windshear that may have been a contributing factor.

The right engine suffered a oil leak in flight following the failure of a hose due to poor maintenance. The following contributing factors were identified:
- Both pilots did not have sufficient experience nor training on this type of aircraft,
- The copilot was flying for this operator for the first time,
- The operator was unable to provide any maintenance documentation nor crew training documentation to investigators,
- Both engines were running at impact but with limited power,
- The right propeller was feathered at impact.

Wrong approach configuration on part of the crew who continued the descent while the aircraft was unstable and moreover with a tailwind component. The aircraft landed at an excessive speed about 450 metres past the runway threshold, reducing the landing distance available. The tailwind component and the crew inexperience was contributing factors.

Poor approach configuration on part of the flying crew who continued the approach after passing the MDA at 1,150 feet while the aircraft was not stabilized and the crew did not establish a visual contact with the obstacles on short final. The following contributing factors were identified:
- Following the first impact with trees, branches and pieces of wood entered the engines, causing a loss of power followed by a loss of speed and altitude,
- Complacency on the part of the crew,
- Pressure and stress,
- Visual perception issues,
- Violation of the standard operating procedures,
- Loss of situational awareness,
- Lack of crew resources management,
- Poor approach and landing planning,
- Poor weather conditions,
- Relative low experience of the copilot.

Double engine failure caused by a fuel exhaustion. It was determined that the crew did not prepare the flight according to procedures and took off with an insufficient fuel quantity on board.