Russia

Wrong approach configuration on part of the flying crew. The following contributing factors were reported:
- Deviations in the actions of the crew during the approach procedure,
- Lack of crew coordination,
- Inconsistencies in crew actions during an instrument approach that resulted in a significant vertical deviation from the calculated descent trajectory and delayed actions to eliminate them,
- Lack of assistance from the approach controller,
- Decision of the crew to continue the approach maneuver instead of initiating a go-around procedure.

It was determined that the copilot was intoxicated when he started his duty and was revoked for this flight and replaced by the flight engineer who was in the right seat at the time of the accident. The crew violation of reducing the operating mode of both engines followed by a sudden increase in power resulted in the left engine being automatically feathered. The following contributing factors were reported:
- Poor crew interactions and coordination;
- Errors in landing calculations;
- Poor approach configuration;
- Disproportionate reaction from the captain;
- The replacement of the copilot by the flight engineer due to his incapacity to fly because he was intoxicated.

Wrong approach configuration on part of the crew. The following contributing factors were reported:
- Excessive speed upon landing,
- Tailwind component,
- Lack of visibility,
- Snow squalls.

The accident was the consequence of a poor planned approach and a wrong approach configuration. The following contributing factors were reported:
- Lack of crew training,
- It was the first time (except for one crew member) that the crew was landing at Yakutsk-Magan Airport,
- Marginal weather conditions (visibility below minimums at the initial destination airport),
- Failure to comply with flight crew recommandations,
- Poor crew instructions and interaction,
- The crew failed to follow the published procedures for a standard approach and landing,
- Deviations in aircraft piloting during approach and landing, causing the aircraft to land too far down the runway,
- The pilot-in-command maintained the aircraft in a nose-up attitude for a period of 9 seconds between the main gear touchdown and the nose gear landing,
- The reverse thrust systems were not activated,
- The spoilers were deployed too late,
- Lack of leadership on part of the captain during the approach and landing,
- The crew did not make the decision to initiate a go-around procedure when the landing maneuver was obviously missed.

It is believed that the dual engine failure was the consequence of an error on part of one of the crew members who inadvertently switched off the electrical systems supplying both engines while trying to deactivate the anti-icing systems. The crew reaction was inappropriate since they took time to identify the failure and failed to feather both propellers. The combination of a late crew reaction with both propellers non feathered (the aircraft was not equipped with an automatic feathering system) increased drag and caused the aircraft to lose height and to crash.

The accident was the consequence of the combination of the following factors:
- Crew fatigue due to excessive duty calendar,
- The crew neglected several procedures and adopted a wrong approach configuration,
- The aircraft was not properly aligned on the glide and was approaching at an insufficient altitude,
- The crew failed to initiate a go-around procedure,
- Lack of crew coordination,
- Absence of crew crosscheck on approach.

The crew's decision to initiate the flight in below minima weather conditions with low ceiling, rain and snow. The crew got disoriented after takeoff and did not realize he was not following the correct route. Also, he continued the flight at an unsafe altitude.