Flight

The aircraft was on a ferry flight from Seattle in the USA to Thailand via Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Scotland and across Europe. However the flight crew abandoned the aircraft in Greenland late in December 2013 after experiencing low oil pressure indications on both engines. This may have been due to the use of an incorrect grade of oil for cold weather operations. The aircraft remained in Greenland until 28 February 2014, when a replacement ferry pilot was engaged. Although the engine oil was not changed prior to departing Greenland, the flight continued uneventfully to Wick, in Scotland. Following some maintenance activity on the right engine, the aircraft departed for Le Touquet in France. However, approximately 25 minutes after takeoff, the engines successively lost power and the pilot carried out a forced landing in a ploughed field. Examination of the engines revealed that one piston in each engine had suffered severe heat damage, consistent with combustion gases being forced past the piston and into the crankcase.

The check airman was conducting the first company training flight for the newly hired second-in-command (SIC). Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data showed that, after departure, the airplane began a series of training maneuvers, consistent with normal operations. About 21 minutes into the flight, when the airplane was about 3,400 ft mean sea level, it began a steep descent and subsequently impacted terrain. An airplane performance study showed that the airplane reached a nose-down pitch of about -40 degrees and that the descent rate reached about 16,000 ft per minute. Numerous previous training flights conducted by the check airman were reviewed using archived ADS-B data and interviews with other pilots. The review revealed that the initial upset occurred during a point in the training when the check airman typically simulated an in-flight emergency and descent. Postaccident examination for the airframe and control surfaces showed that the airplane was configured for cruise flight at the time of the initial upset. Examination of the primary and secondary flight control cables indicated that the cables were all intact at the time of impact. Trim actuator measurements showed an abnormal trailing-edge-up, nose-down configuration on both trim tabs. The two elevator trim actuator measurements were inconsistent with each other, indicating that one of the actuators was likely moved during the wreckage recovery. Based on the supporting data, it is likely that one of the actuators indicated the correct trim tab position at the time of impact. Simulated airplane performance calculations showed that, during a pitch trim excursion, the control forces required to counter an anomaly increases to unmanageable levels unless the appropriate remedial procedures are quickly applied. Given the simulated airplane performance calculations, the trim actuator measurements, and the check airman's known training routine, it is likely that the check airman simulated a pitch trim excursion and that the SIC, who lacked experience in the airplane type, did not appropriately respond to the excursion. The check airman did not take remedial action and initiate the recovery procedure in time to prevent the control forces from becoming unmanageable and to ensure that recovery from the associated dive was possible.

The four engine aircraft departed Agra-Kheria Airport at 1000LT on a combined exercice with a second C-130, carrying five crew members. The goal of the mission was to simulate drops at low altitude. At a height of about 300 feet, the aircraft encountered wake turbulences from the preceding airplane. It is believed that the crew attempted to gain height when control was lost. The aircraft crashed in the rocky bed of a river near Karauli. The aircraft was destroyed and all five occupants were killed. Built in 2010 and delivered to IAF in April 2011, the aircraft was one of the six examples ordered by IAF.

About 3 months before the accident, the pilot received about 9 hours of flight instruction, including completion of an instrument proficiency check, in the airplane. The accident flight was a personal cross-country flight operated under instrument flight rules (IFR). Radar track data depicted the flight proceeding on a west-southwest course at 15,800 ft mean sea level (msl) as it approached the destination airport. The flight was cleared by the air traffic controller for a GPS approach, passed the initial approach fix, and, shortly afterward, began a descent as permitted by the approach procedure. The track data indicated that the flight became established on the initial approach segment and remained above the designated minimum altitude of 12,000 ft msl. Average descent rates based on the available altitude data ranged from 500 feet per minute (fpm) to 1,000 fpm during this portion of the flight. At the intermediate navigation fix, the approach procedure required pilots to turn right and track a north-northwest course toward the airport. The track data indicated that the flight entered a right turn about 1 mile before reaching the intermediate fix. As the airplane entered the right turn, its average descent rate reached 4,000 fpm. The flight subsequently tracked northbound for nearly 1-1/2 miles. During this portion of the flight, the airplane initially descended at an average rate of 3,500 fpm then climbed at a rate of 1,800 fpm. The airplane subsequently entered a second right turn. The final three radar data points were each located within 505 ft laterally of each other and near the approximate accident site location. The average descent rate between the final two data points (altitudes of 10,100 ft msl and 8,700 ft msl) was 7,000 fpm. About the time that the final data point was recorded, the pilot informed the air traffic controller that the airplane was in a spin and that he was attempting to recover. No further communications were received from the pilot. The airplane subsequently impacted the surface of a reservoir at an elevation of about 6,780 ft and came to rest in 60 ft of water. A detailed postaccident examination of the airframe, engine and propeller assembly did not reveal any anomalies consistent with a preimpact failure or malfunction. The available meteorological data suggested that the airplane encountered clouds (tops about 16,000 ft msl or higher and bases about 10,000 ft msl) and was likely operating in IFR conditions during the final 15 minutes of the flight; however, no determination could be made regarding whether the clouds that the airplane descended through were solid or layered. In addition, the data suggested the possibility of both light icing and light turbulence between 12,000 ft msl and 16,000 ft msl along the flight path. Although the pilot appeared to be managing the flight appropriately during the initial descent, it could not be determined why he was unable to navigate to the approach fixes and maintain control of the airplane as he turned toward the airport and continued the descent.

The pilot's friend reported that the pilot planned to fly his recently purchased twin-engine airplane over his friend's home to show it to him and another friend. The pilot's friends and several other witnesses reported observing the pilot performing low-level, high-speed aerobatic maneuvers before the airplane collided with trees and then terrain. A 1.75-liter bottle of whiskey was found in the airplane wreckage. A review of the pilot's Federal Aviation Administration medical records revealed that he had a history of alcohol dependence but had reportedly been sober for almost 4 years. Toxicological testing revealed that the pilot had a blood alcohol content of 0.252 milligrams of alcohol per deciliter of blood, which was over six times the limit (0.040) Federal Aviation Regulations allowed for pilots operating an aircraft.

The Boeing 777-2H6ER took off from Kuala Lumpur Airport runway 32R at 0041LT bound for Beijing. Some 40 minutes later, while reaching FL350 over the Gulf of Thailand, radar contact was lost. At this time, the position of the aircraft was estimated 90 NM northeast of Kota Bharu, some 2 km from the IGARI waypoint. More than 4 days after the 'accident', no trace of the aircraft has been found. On the fifth day of operation, several countries were involved in the SAR operations, in the Gulf of Thailand, west of China Sea and on the Malacca Strait as well. All operations are performed in coordination with China, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Philippines. No distress call or any kind of message was sent by the crew. The last ACARS message was received at 0107LT and did not contain any error, failure or technical problems. At 0119LT was recorded the last radio transmission with the crew saying "All right, good night". At 0121LT, the transponder was switched off and the last radar contact was recorded at 0130LT. Several hypothesis are open and no trace of the aircraft nor the occupant have been found up to March 18, 2014. It is now understood the aircraft may flew several hours after it disappeared from radar screens, flying on an opposite direction from the prescribed flight plan, most probably to the south over the Indian Ocean. No such situation was ever noted by the B3A, so it is now capital to find both CVR & DFDR to explain the exact circumstances of this tragic event. Considering the actual situation, all scenarios are possible and all hypothesis are still open. On Mar 24, 2014, the Malaysian Prime Minister announced that according to new computations by the British AAIB based on new satellite data, there is no reasonable doubt that flight MH370 ended in the South Indian Ocean some 2,600 km west of Perth. Given the situation, the Malaysian Authorities believe that there is no chance to find any survivors among the 239 occupants.

***************************

According to the testimony of 6 Swiss Citizens making a cruise between Perth and Singapore via Jakarta, the following evidences were spotted on March 12 while approaching the Sunda Strait:
1430LT - latitude 6° S, longitude 105° E, speed 17,7 knots:
life jacket, food trays, papers, pieces of polystyrene, wallets,
1500LT:
a huge white piece of 6 meters long to 2,5 meters wide with other debris,
1530LT:
two masts one meter long with small flags on top, red and blue,
2030LT - latitude 5° S, longitude 107° E, speed 20,2 knots.

This testimony was submitted by these 6 Swiss Citizens to the Chinese and Australian Authorities.

On April 21, 2016, it was confirmed that this testimony was recorded by the Swiss Police and transmitted to the Swiss Transportation Safety Investigation Board (STSB), the State authority of the Swiss Confederation which has a mandate to investigate accidents and dangerous incidents involving trains, aircraft, inland navigation ships, and seagoing vessels. The link to the STSB is http://www.sust.admin.ch/en/index.html.

***************************

On July 29, 2015, a flaperon was found on a beach of the French Island of La Réunion, in the Indian Ocean. It was quickly confirmed by the French Authorities (BEA) that the debris was part of the Malaysian B777. Other debris have been found since, in Mozambique and South Africa.

On May 12, 2016, Australia's TSB reported that the part has been identified to be a "the decorative laminate as an interior panel from the main cabin. The location of a piano hinge on the part surface was consistent with a work-table support leg, utilised on the exterior of the MAB Door R1 (forward, right hand) closet panel". The ATSB reported that they were not able to identify any feature on the debris unique to MH-370, however, there is no record that such a laminate is being used by any other Boeing 777 customer.

***************************

On September 15, 2016, the experts from the Australian Transportation Safety Bureau (ATSB) have completed their examination of the large piece of debris discovered on the island of Pemba, off the coast of Tanzania, on June 20, 2016. Based on thorough examination and analysis, ATSB with the concurrence of the MH370 Safety Investigation Team have identified the following:
- Several part numbers, along with physical appearance, dimensions, and construction confirmed the piece to be an inboard section of a Boeing 777 outboard flap.
- A date stamp associated with one of the part numbers indicated manufacture on January 23, 2002, which was consistent with the May 31, 2002 delivery date for MH370,
- In addition to the Boeing part number, all identification stamps had a second 'OL' number that were unique identifiers relating to part construction,
- The Italian part manufacturer has confirmed that all numbers located on the said part relates to the same serial number outboard flap that was shipped to Boeing as line number 404,
- The manufacturer also confirmed that aircraft line number 404 was delivered to Malaysian Airlines and registered as 9M-MRO (MH370)

As such, the experts have concluded that the debris, an outboard flap originated from the aircraft 9M-MRO, also known as flight MH370. Further examination of the debris will continue, in hopes that further evidence may be uncovered which may provide new insight into the circumstances surrounding flight MH370.

The crew was performing an illegal flight with narcotics on board and entered illegally the Venezuelan airspace. The crew was forced to land in an open field by Venezuela Army Forces and the aircraft crashed, bursting into flames. While the aircraft was destroyed by a post crash fire, the fate of both occupants remains unknown.

En route, the crew encountered technical issues and attempted to make a belly landing in a desert and rocky area located in the Hadhramaut. The aircraft came to rest and was damaged beyond repair while all 19 occupants (among them three were injured) were kidnapped by local tribesmen. The exact cause of the technical malfunction remains unknown. The aircraft was on its way to the oil field of Masila that belongs to Canadian Nexen and members of the Yemeni president family.

On 16 February 2014, the Twin Otter (DHC6/300) aircraft with registration number 9N-ABB, owned and operated by Nepal Airlines Corporation (NAC), departed Kathmandu at 0610 UTC (1155 LT) on its schedule flight to Jumla carrying 18 persons on board including 3 crews. Detailed sectors to be covered by the flight No. RA 183/718 was Kathmandu–Pokhara–Jumla-Nepālganj (Night stop). Flight from Kathmandu to Pokhara completed in normal condition. After 17 minutes on ground at Pokhara airport and refueling 9N-ABB departed Pokhara at 0658 for Jumla. After Jumla flight, the aircraft was scheduled to Night stop at Nepālganj. Next day it was to do a series of shuttle flights from Nepālganj. Prevailing westerly weather had a severe impact on most of the domestic flights since last two days. A.M.E. of Engineering Department of NAC who had performed D.I. of 9N ABB had mentioned in his written report to the Commission that he had reminded the diversion of Bhojpur flight of NAC due weather and asked the Captain whether he had weather briefing of the Western Nepal or not. In response to the AME's query the Captain had replied casually that- "weather is moving from west to east and now west is improving". Pilots behavior was reported normal by the ground staffs of Kathmandu and Pokhara airports prior to the commencement of flight on that day. All the pre and post departure procedure of the flight were completed in normal manner. Before departure to Jumla from Pokhara, Pilots obtained Jumla and Bhairahawa weather and seems to be encouraged with VFR Weather at both stations. However, they were unable to make proper assessment of en route weather. PIC decided to remain south of track to avoid the terrain and weather. CVR read out revealed that pilots were aware and concerned about the icing conditions due to low outside air temperature. After around 25 minutes, probably maneuvering to avoid weather, the PIC instructed the co-pilot to plan a route further south of their position, to fly through the Dang valley. The copilot selected Dang in the GPS, on a bearing of 283°, and determined the required altitude was 8500ft. He then raised concerns that the aircraft may not have enough fuel to reach the planned destination. Approximately two and a half minutes before the accident, the PIC initiated a descent, and the copilot advised against this. As per CVR read out, last heading recorded by copilot, approximately one minute before the crash, was 280. The last one minute was a very critical phase of the flight during which PIC said I am entering (perhaps inside the cloud). At that time copilot called Bhairahawa Tower on his own and got latest Bhairahawa weather. While copilot was transmitting its last position report to Bhairahawa Control Tower (approximately 25 miles from Bhairahawa), PIC interrupted and declared to divert Bhairahawa. Bhairahawa Control Tower wanted the pilots to confirm their present position. But crews were very much occupied and copilot said STANDBY. Just few seconds before crash copilot had told PIC not to descend. Copilot also suggested PIC in two occasions - sir don't turn. Very unfortunately aircraft was crashed. The aircraft disintegrated on impact and all 18 occupants were killed.

The twin engine aircraft departed Bucharest-Baneasa Airport on an ambulance flight to Oradea, carrying a medical team, one patient and two pilots. Doctors should go to Oradea to obtain transplant organs from a patient who just passed away. While cruising at an altitude of 6,300 feet vertical to the Apuseni Mountain Range, the crew encountered marginal weather conditions with icing conditions but continued when both engines lost power and failed. The crew attempted an emergency landing when the aircraft collided with trees and crashed in a snowy and wooded hillside at an altitude of 1,400 metres. A pilot and a passenger were killed while five other occupants were injured. The aircraft was destroyed.