Flight

The crew was engaged in a spraying mission over rice paddy fields in the region of Kiliya, Odessa. While completing the 18th sortie of the day, flying at a height of 50 metres and at a speed of 140-150 km/h, the engine failed. The crew attempted an emergency landing when the aircraft hit obstacles and trees and crashed. The captain escaped unhurt while the copilot was slightly injured. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

On 16 June 2017, a Pacific Aerospace Ltd FU24 Stallion, registered VH-EUO (EUO), was conducting aerial agricultural operations from a private airstrip at Redhill, 36 km north-north-east of Bathurst, New South Wales (NSW). The operations planned for that day involved the aerial application of fertiliser on three properties in the Upper Turon area of NSW. At about 0700 Eastern Standard Time on the morning of the accident, the pilot and loader drove to Bathurst Airport to fill the fuel tanker and then continued to the worksite at the Redhill airstrip in the Upper Turon area, arriving at about 0830. Work on the first property started at about 0900, with the first flight of the day commencing at 0920. Work on the first property continued until 1350 with two refuelling stops at 1048 and 1250. Approximately 40 tonnes of fertiliser was applied on the first job. In preparation for the second job, fertiliser and seed were loaded into the aircraft and maps of the second job area were passed to the pilot. At 1357, the aircraft took off for the first flight of the second job. The aircraft returned to reload, and at 1405 the aircraft took off for the second flight. A short time later, at 14:06:59, recorded flight data from the aircraft ceased. When the aircraft did not return as expected, the loader radioed the pilot. When the loader could not raise the pilot on the radio, he became concerned and drove his vehicle down the airstrip to see if the aircraft had experienced a problem on the initial climb. Finding no sign of the aircraft, he returned to the load site, while continuing to call the pilot on the radio. He then drove to the application area to search for the aircraft before returning to the load site. With no sign of the aircraft, the loader called emergency services to raise the alarm. By about 1500, police had arrived on site and a ground search commenced. A police helicopter also joined the search, which was eventually called off due to low light. The next morning, at about 0630, the search recommenced and included NSW Police State Emergency Service personnel, and local volunteers. At about 0757, the wreckage of the aircraft was found in dense bush on the side of a hill to the east of the application area. The pilot was found deceased in the aircraft. The aircraft was found approximately 17 hours after the last recorded flight data and there were no witnesses to the accident.

The aircraft departed Mergui (Myeik) Airport at 1306LT bound for Yangon, carrying soldiers and their family members. While cruising at an altitude of 18,000 feet in good weather conditions, radar contact was lost with the airplane that crashed in unknown circumstances in the Andaman Sea at 1335LT. SAR operations were initiated and first debris were found at the end of the afternoon about 218 km off the city of Dawei, according of the Myanmar Army Chief of Staff. It is believed that none of the occupants survived the crash. Brand new, the aircraft has been delivered to the Myanmar Air Force in March 2016. The Shaanxi Y-8 is a Chinese version of the Antonov AN-12 built post 2010. The tail of the aircraft was found a week later and both CFR and DFDR were recovered and transmitted to the Army for further investigations.

The twin engine airplane departed El Palomar Airport at 1604LT on a training flight, carrying one passenger and two pilots. While descending to Buenos Aires-Ezeiza-Ministro Pistarini Airport, the right engine failed. The crew was unable to restart the engine and to maintain a safe altitude, so he attempted an emergency landing when the aircraft crashed in an open field located 24 km from the airport, bursting into flames. All three occupants were injured and the aircraft was partially destroyed by fire.

The commercial pilot and three passengers were making a personal cross-country flight over ocean waters in the MU-2B airplane. During cruise flight at flight level (FL) 240, the airplane maintained the same relative heading, airspeed, and altitude for about 2.5 hours before radar contact was lost. While the airplane was in flight, a significant meteorological information notice was issued that warned of frequent thunderstorms with tops to FL440 in the accident area at the accident time. Satellite imagery showed cloud tops in the area were up to FL400. Moderate or greater icing conditions and super cooled large drops (SLD) were likely near or over the accident area at the accident time. Although the wreckage was not located for examination, the loss of the airplane's radar target followed by the identification of debris and a fuel sheen on the water below the last radar target location suggests that the airplane entered an uncontrolled descent after encountering adverse weather and impacted the water. Before beginning training in the airplane about 4 months before the accident, the pilot had 21 hours of multi engine experience accumulated during sporadic flights over 9 years. Per a special federal aviation regulation, a pilot must complete specific ground and flight training and log a minimum of 100 flight hours as pilot-in-command (PIC) in multi engine airplanes before acting as PIC of a MU-2B airplane. Once the pilot began training in the airplane, he appeared to attempt to reach the 100-hour threshold quickly, flying about 50 hours in 1 month. These 50 hours included about 40 hours of long, cross-country flights that the flight instructor who was flying with the pilot described as "familiarization flights" for the pilot and "demonstration flights" for the airplane's owner. The pilot successfully completed the training required for the MU-2B, and at the time of the accident, he had accumulated an estimated 120 hours of multi engine flight experience of which 100 hours were in the MU-2B. Although an MU-2B instructor described the pilot as a good, attentive student, it cannot be determined if his training was ingrained enough for him to effectively apply it in an operational environment without an instructor present. Although available evidence about the pilot's activities suggested he may not have obtained adequate restorative sleep during the night before the accident, there was insufficient evidence to determine the extent to which fatigue played a role in his decision making or the sequence of events.The pilot's last known weather briefing occurred about 8 hours before the airplane departed, and it is not known if the pilot obtained any updated weather information before or during the flight. Sufficient weather information (including a hazardous weather advisory provided by an air traffic control broadcast message about 25 minutes before the accident) was available for the pilot to expect convective activity and the potential for icing along the accident flight's route; however, there is no evidence from the airplane's radar track or the pilot's communications with air traffic controllers that he recognized or attempted to avoid the convective conditions or exit icing conditions.

The Beechcraft LR-2 Hayabusa (a version of the Beechcraft 350 Super King Air) departed Sapporo-Okadama Airport at 1123LT on a flight to Hakodate to evacuate a patient. On board were two doctors and two pilots. While descending to Hakodate at an altitude of 3,000 feet, the crew encountered poor weather conditions with low clouds and rain showers when the airplane registered 23057 (JG-3057) impacted the slope of a mountain located near Assabu, about 40 km northwest of Hakodate Airport. The aircraft disintegrated on impact and all four occupants were killed.

The commercial pilot departed on a planned 1-hour cargo cross-country flight in the autopilot-equipped airplane. About 3 minutes after departure, the controller instructed the pilot to fly direct to the destination airport at 2,000 ft mean sea level (msl). The pilot acknowledged the clearance, and there were no further radio transmissions from the airplane. The airplane continued flying past the destination airport in straight-and-level flight at 2,100 ft msl, consistent with the airplane operating under autopilot control, until it was about 100 miles beyond the destination airport. A witness near the accident site watched the airplane fly over at a low altitude, heard three "pops" come from the airplane, and then saw it bank to the left and begin to descend. The airplane continued in the descending left turn until he lost sight of it as it dropped below the horizon. The airplane impacted trees in about a 45° left bank and a level pitch attitude and came to rest in a heavily wooded area. The airplane sustained extensive thermal damage from a postcrash fire; however, examination of the remaining portions of the airframe, flight controls, engines, and engine accessories revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. The fuel selector valves were found on the outboard tanks, which was in accordance with the normal cruise procedures in the pilot's operating handbook. Calculations based on the airplane's flight records and the fuel consumption information in the engine manual indicated that, at departure, the outboard tanks of the airplane contained sufficient fuel for about 1 hour 10 minutes of flight. The airplane had been flying for about 1 hour 15 minutes when the accident occurred. Therefore, it is likely that the fuel in the outboard tanks was exhausted; without pilot action to switch fuel tanks, the engines lost power as a result of fuel starvation, and the airplane descended and impacted trees and terrain. The overflight of the intended destination and the subsequent loss of engine power due to fuel starvation are indicative of pilot incapacitation. The pilot's autopsy identified no significant natural disease:however, the examination was limited by the severity of damage to the body. Further, there are a number of conditions, including cardiac arrhythmias, seizures, or other causes of loss of consciousness, that could incapacitate a pilot and leave no evidence at autopsy. The pilot's toxicology results indicated that the pilot had used marijuana/tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) at some point before the accident. THC can impair judgment, but it does not cause incapacitation; therefore, the circumstances of this accident are not consistent with impairment from THC, and, the pilot's THC use likely did not contribute to this accident. The reason for the pilot's incapacitation could not be determined.

The airline transport pilot was conducting a commercial visual flight rules (VFR) flight. A passenger who was on the first segment stated that the pilot flew the airplane lower than usual for that route, and that the airplane flew through clouds during the flight. The passenger disembarked and the pilot departed on the second segment of the flight with a load of mail. The route included flight across a peninsula of mountainous terrain to a remote coastal airport that lacked official weather reporting or instrument approach procedures. About 28 minutes after departure, an emergency locator transmitter (ELT) signal from the airplane was received and a search and rescue operation was initiated. The wreckage was located about 24 miles from the destination in deep snow on the side of a steep, featureless mountain at an elevation about 3,000 ft mean sea level. The accident site displayed signatures consistent with impact during a left turn. Examination of the airplane revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane was not equipped with any recording or flight tracking devices, nor was it required to be; therefore, the airplane's flight track before the accident could not be determined. The airplane was certified for instrument flight and flight in icing conditions and was equipped with a terrain avoidance warning system (TAWS) which was not inhibited during the accident. Although the TAWS should have provided the pilot with alerts as the airplane neared the terrain, it could not be determined if this occurred or if the pilot heeded the alerts. A review of nearby weather camera images revealed complete mountain obscuration conditions with likely rain shower activity in the vicinity of the accident site. Visible and infrared satellite imagery indicated overcast cloud cover over the accident site at the time of the accident. The graphical forecast products that were available to the pilot before the flight indicated marginal VFR conditions for the entire route. There was no evidence that the pilot obtained an official weather briefing, and what weather information he may have accessed before the flight could not be determined. Additionally, the cloud conditions and snow-covered terrain present in the area likely resulted in flat light conditions, which would have hindered the pilot's ability to perceive terrain features and closure rates. Based on the weather camera, surface, and upper air observations, it is likely that the pilot encountered instrument meteorological conditions inflight, after which he performed a left turn to return to visual meteorological conditions and did not recognize his proximity to the mountain due to the flat light conditions. The pilot and the dispatch agent signed a company flight risk assessment form before the flight, which showed that the weather conditions for the flight were within the company's acceptable risk parameters. Although the village agents at the departure and destination airports stated that the weather at those coastal locations was good, the weather assessment for the accident flight was based on hours-old observations provided by a village agent who was not trained in weather observation and did not include en route weather information, the area forecast, or the AIRMET for mountain obscuration effective during the dispatch time and at the time of the accident. Since acquiring the accident route from another operator years earlier, the company had not performed a risk assessment of the route and its associated hazards. Multiple company pilots described the accident route of flight as hazardous and considered it an undesirable route due to the terrain, rapidly changing weather, and lack of weather reporting infrastructure; however, the company did not address or attempt to mitigate these known hazards through its risk assessment processes. The company's controlled-flight-into-terrain (CFIT)-avoidance program stated that each pilot shall have one classroom training session and one CFIT-avoidance training session in an aviation training device (ATD) each year; however, the pilot's training records indicated that his most recent ATD session was 15 months prior. More recent CFIT avoidance training may have resulted in the pilot recognizing and responding to the reduced visibility and flat light conditions sooner.

The airplane departed Playa Baracoa Airport at 0638LT on a training flight and continued to the southwest. En route, it impacted the slope of Mt Loma de la Pimienta located about six km north of San Cristóbal, province of Artemisa. The aircraft was destroyed and all eight crew members were killed. Owned by Aerogaviota, the airplane was operated by the Cuban Air Force (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias) under flight code FAR1436.

On 12 April 2017, a Cessna C208 aircraft registered PK-FSO was being operated by PT. Spirit Avia Sentosa (FlyingSAS) for unscheduled cargo flight. The flights of the day scheduled for the aircraft were Mopah Airport (WAKK) – Tanah Merah Airport (WAKT) – Oksibil Airport (WAJO) – Tanah Merah – Oksibil – Tanah Merah. The estimated time departure of first flight from Mopah Airport to Tanah Merah was 0800 LT and the flight departed at 0848 LT, on board the aircraft were two pilots and seven passengers. The aircraft arrived in Tanah Merah at about 0943 LT. At 1012 LT, the flight departed from Tanah Merah to Oksibil. About 10 Nm from Oksibil the pilot contacted the Oksibil tower controller to get air traffic services and landed at 1044 LT. The flight then departed from Oksibil to Tanah Merah at 1058 LT and arrived about 1126 LT. These flights were single pilot operation. At 1144 LT on daylight condition, the aircraft departed Tanah Merah with intended cruising altitude of 7,000 feet. Prior to departure, there was no report or record of aircraft system malfunction. On board the aircraft was one pilot, 1,225 kg of general cargo and 800 pounds of fuel which was sufficient for about 3 hours of flight time. After departure, the pilot advised Tanah Merah tower controller of the estimate time arrival at Oksibil would be 1224 LT. At 1149 LT, the pilot advised Tanah Merah tower controller that the aircraft position was about 10 Nm from Tanah Merah and passing altitude of 3,500 feet. The Tanah Merah tower controller acknowledged the message and advised the pilot to monitor radio communication on frequency 122.7 MHz for traffic monitoring. At about 29 Nm from Oksibil, the PK-FSO aircraft passed a Cessna 208B aircraft which was flying on opposite direction from Oksibil to Tanah Merah at altitude 6,000 feet. At this time, the aircraft ground speed recorded on the flight following system was about 164 knots. The Cessna 208B pilot advised to the pilot on radio frequency 122.7 MHz that the PK-FSO aircraft was in sight. The pilot responded that the aircraft was maintaining 7,000 feet on direct route to Oksibil. At 1230 LT, the Oksibil tower controller received phone call from the FlyingSAS officer at Jakarta which confirming whether the PK-FSO aircraft has landed on Oksibil. The Oksibil tower controller responded that there was no communication with the PK-FSO pilot. The Oksibil tower controller did not receive the flight plan for the second flight of the PK-FSO flight. Afterwards, the Oksibil tower controller called Tanah Merah tower controller confirming the PK-FSO flight and was informed that PK-FSO departed Tanah Merah to Oksibil at 1144 LT and the reported estimate time of arrival Oksibil was 1224 LT. At 1240 LT, the Oksibil tower controller received another phone call from the FlyingSAS officer at Jakarta which informed that the FlyingSAS flight following system received SOS signal (emergency signal) from PK-FSO aircraft and the last position recorded was on coordinate 04°48’47.7” S; 140°39’31.7” E which located approximately 6 Nm north of Oksibil. Afterwards, the Oksibil air traffic controller advised the occurrence to the Search and Rescue Agency. On 13 April 2017, at 0711 LT, the PK-FSO aircraft was found on ridge of Anem Mountain which located about 7 Nm north of Oksibil. The following figure showed the illustration of the aircraft track plotted on the Google earth refer to the known coordinates of Tanah Merah, Oksibil and the crash site.