Ferry

The crew departed Šentvid pri Stični on a flight to Maribor as the aircraft should be transferred to Hungary for maintenance purposes. While cruising in poor visibility due to fog, the aircraft struck the slope of a mountain located near Trbovlje. A pilot was seriously injured while the second one was killed. The aircraft was destroyed.

On December 20, 2007 at approximately 1630EST, N954PA a Cessna 208B Caravan aircraft, owned and operated by Agape Flight Inc [United States FAR Part 91 Operator] enroute from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic to West Palm Beach, Florida incurred sudden engine stoppage. At the time N954PA was flying at 12,000 ft. The aircraft was diverted to the nearest airport but was unable to glide the required distance and landed 30 nautical miles (NM) West North West (WNW) of Chub Cay. There were 2 crew members on board the aircraft. No injuries were reported by the crew. The aircraft is submerged in approximately eighteen to twenty feet of water, with the aircraft tail being visible at low tide. Both crews were qualified in accordance with the United States Code of Federal Regulations.

The aircraft was returning to its base in Rio de Janeiro-Santos Dumont following an ambulance flight to Campo de Marte AFB. Shortly after takeoff from runway 30, while climbing to an altitude of 1,400 feet, the aircraft rolled to the right to an angle of 90° then entered an uncontrolled descent and crashed onto several houses located on Bernardino de Sena Street, bursting into flames. Both pilots as well as six people on the ground were killed. Six others people were seriously injured.

The Britten Norman “Islander” aircraft, registration G-CHES, had flown on the morning of 17 October 2007 over various points of the Sierra Morena and the north part of the province of Seville. Its mission had been to scout the various flight fields which would be available to the aircraft in future operations. The purpose of that day’s flight was to land at a temporary runway in the town of Guadalcanal, in the province of Seville on the border with the province of Badajoz. This runway, used by airplanes on agricultural flights, is some five kilometers SW of the town. The pilot, however, mistakenly landed at another temporary field, with the same bearing and approximately halfway between the town and the other runway on Guadalcanal. The runway on which it landed, called Los Tomillares (after the name of the ranch on which it is located), is considerably shorter. The distance available was sufficient for the airplane’s sole pilot to land normally. In order to be able to depart from that strip, which measured only 400 m in length, the pilot telephoned for help and guidance in order to make the short four-kilometer flight from that strip to the runway in Guadalcanal, his original destination. In response to his call for help, a pilot with experience on that type of airplane reported to the strip early in the afternoon and joined the pilot as a crew advisor on the aircraft in order to aid the pilot in command. Two other persons on the ground provided assistance loading fuel in the main tanks. The gasoline was taken to the aerodrome in 50-liter plastic drums, which were placed inside the aircraft once emptied, since they were operating between runways in which there was no refueling service. A total of 250 liters of AV100LL fuel was deposited in the main tanks. Both pilots walked the length of the field at Los Tomillares to check its condition and dimensions. They determined its length by counting their steps. They also determined its gradient. Although the surface was made of uncompacted dirt, they calculated that it was sufficient for takeoff, which they decided to do toward the southeast to take advantage of the favorable negative slope. Specifically, they planned to depart on a SE heading, turn 90° right, and continue flying south until they were lined up with the Guadalcanal runway. They planned to land on a NW course. They postponed the operation until late in the afternoon, before sunset, so as to avoid glare from the setting sun while landing at Guadalcanal. According to eyewitness accounts, the pilot in command did the pre-flight check and dismissed the ground assistants, who left before the airplane took off. A few minutes later, at 19:30, half an hour prior to sunset, the aircraft headed for the runway threshold. Shortly thereafter it started its takeoff, gaining speed and becoming airborne prior to reaching the opposite threshold. The right engine then started to fail partially, causing the airplane to yaw hard to the right. The pilot in command, seated to the left, was flying the airplane. According to the statement of the accompanying pilot, who was seated in the RH seat, when the engine failed, the pilot asked him to take the flight controls while he attempted to restore power to the right engine. After lowering the nose, they started to descend slightly, managing to correct the right yaw by applying left rudder. They had practically managed to regain directional control of the aircraft when the right engine started to run at full power once more, propelling the aircraft, which caused it to veer left, toward higher ground. They were unable to avoid the impact. The aircraft’s left wingtip impacted first, hitting some bushes on the hillside. A few meters later the left gear wheel made contact. After crossing a small river bed, the aircraft’s left wing and forward fuselage impacted, with the airplane coming to a stop after traveling along the ground for a few meters. The impact site was on the runway centerline extension and some 400 m from the southeast threshold, which they had overflown a few seconds earlier when taking off. The aircraft was seriously damaged and was essentially destroyed. There was no fire after the impact.

The airline transport pilot was departing in a twin engine turboprop airplane on a ferry flight from a remote lodge airstrip that was about 1,000 feet long and 40 feet wide. The airplane had previously received substantial damage to the nose wheel assembly on a previous flight to the airstrip. Repairs were made to the airframe, and the pilot was departing for a maintenance facility. The pilot had flown in and out of the airstrip on numerous occasions, but not in the accident type airplane. The lodge owner reported that the pilot started both engines and taxied the length of the airstrip, stopping momentarily several times. The pilot ran the engines for about 20 minutes, and then began a takeoff to the south. The airplane appeared to accelerate and remain on the centerline of the airstrip, but did not liftoff until the very end of the airstrip. The owner did not notice any unusual sounds or appearance of the engines. After liftoff, the wheels of the airplane struck and broke off the tops of trees and shrubs, that were about 6 to 7 feet above the ground. The airplane immediately veered to the right, and went out of the lodge owner's sight, but he continued to hear the airplane hitting trees until final impact. The airplane crashed in a shallow lake, coming to rest about 300 feet from shore, in about 5 feet of water. The entire cockpit area, forward of the wings, was torn off the airframe. The validity of any postaccident cockpit and instrument findings was unreliable due to the extensive damage to the cockpit. Likewise, structural damage to the airframe precluded determining wing flap settings during takeoff. Performance calculations indicated that the airplane's takeoff distance would have been about 950 feet, although the lodge owner said that in his experience, the accident airplane was capable of lifting off about half way down the airstrip without difficulty. The circumstances of the takeoff indicated that the left engine had been producing sufficient power to chop through several trees during the crash. Testing and inspection of the right engine was inconclusive, and although it was run on a test stand at reduced power, full power could not be attained due to ingestion of foreign material during the test run.

The crew departed Punia on a ferry flight to Goma. About 10 minutes into the flight, while cruising at a relative low altitude, the aircraft collided with power lines. The crew attempted an emergency landing when the aircraft crashed in the Lowa River located about 30 km northeast of Punia, coming to rest upside down. Both pilots escaped with minor injuries while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The pilot was ferrying the aircraft under the visual flight rules (VFR) from the operator’s base at Tully, Qld to Ingham and return. The flights, conducted in the private category without passengers, were to allow aircraft maintenance to be conducted at Ingham. The flight from Tully to Ingham was conducted in the morning, with no reported difficulties. At 1454 Eastern Standard Time, the pilot departed Ingham on the return flight to Tully. The aircraft did not arrive at Tully. It was not until the next day that the pilot and aircraft were reported missing. Australian Search and Rescue (AusSAR) was notified and a search, based on the last air traffic control radar observed position of an unidentified aircraft from a replay of recorded radar data together with witness reports from the area, was initiated. Searchers located the aircraft wreckage on the morning of 18 August. The aircraft had impacted mountainous terrain in a state forest 24 km south of Tully. The pilot was fatally injured and the aircraft was destroyed.

The aircraft was departing Mogadishu on a ferry flight to Minsk with an intermediate stop in Djibouti City, carrying 4 technicians of the operator and 7 crew members who were returning to Belarus after they recovered materials and instruments from another II-76 (EW-78826) that was damaged beyond repair at Mogadishu Airport last March 9. Shortly after takeoff, while in initial climb, the aircraft was hit by a missile that struck the left wing between both engines n°1 and 2. An explosion occurred and the aircraft caught fire. The crew initiated a turn when the left wing detached and crashed in the sea. Out of control, the aircraft crashed on a beach near the airport, killing all 11 occupants.

The airplane impacted a fence and terrain on short final during a visual approach to runway 27. The airplane was operated as a cargo airplane with two flight crewmembers by a commercial operator certificated under 14 CFR Part 135. The flightcrew worked approximately 18.75 hours within a 24-hour period leading up to the accident performing flights listed by the operator as either 14 CFR Part 91 or 14 CFR Part 135, all of which were in the conduct of company business. Of this total, 5.9 hours involved flying conducted under 14 CFR Part 135. The flight to the accident airport was for the purposes of picking up repair parts for another company airplane that received minor damage in which the flight crew was previously piloting in the 24- hour period. They were then going to fly back to the operator's home base on the same day, which would have had an estimated flying time of 2:45 hours. The captain said he was tired and that he and the first officer had not slept at any of the stops made during the period. The captain said that the company likes for the airplanes to return to their home base. The captain said that the company prefers an option for pilots to stay overnight if tired and he has stayed overnight on previous trips but only due to maintenance related reasons. The Aeronautical Information Manual states that acute fatigue affects timing and perceptional field performance.

The airport's instrument approach procedures included a very high frequency, omnidirectional range (VOR) approach, and a global positioning system (GPS) approach that was not an overlay. The VOR approach procedure included an inbound course to the VOR, and after passage, a descent along the same course to a missed approach point. The missed approach point was defined as 6 nautical miles beyond the VOR, as well as by timing. The pilot twice attempted the VOR approach in instrument meteorological conditions. He flew the first approach to the missed approach point, initiated a missed approach, contacted the controller, and requested a second VOR approach. He then received vectors to rejoin the approach course inbound to the VOR. The airplane subsequently passed over the VOR, on course, about 100 feet above the minimum altitude. However, instead of descending as described in the procedure, the airplane maintained that altitude until reaching the airport, then began a descent. The airplane continued to travel outbound along the same approach course until it impacted rising terrain about 6.5 miles beyond the airport. There was no dedicated distance measuring equipment (DME) onboard the airplane. Instead, distance was determined by the use of an instrument flight rules (IFR)-approved GPS unit. Due to the non-storage capability of the unit, historical waypoint selection could not be determined. The pilot could have selected the airport as a "direct to" waypoint, or, if he had entered flight plan waypoints, the unit would have sequenced from the VOR to the airport during the first approach. In either case, unless the pilot reprogrammed the unit, the last waypoint entered would have remained at the airport, rather than the VOR. The pilot then most likely mistook the airport position for the VOR position, and displaced the beginning of the descent by 6 nautical miles. Also noted, was that once the airplane passed over the VOR en route to the airport, the HSI would have indicated a change of "to" to "from". There were no medical anomalies noted with the pilot and no mechanical anomalies noted with the airplane.