Landing (descent or approach)

The aircraft was returning to Moscow on a ferry flight after passengers have been dropped off in Hurghada. On approach to Moscow-Domodedovo Airport, the visibility was low due to foggy conditions. Horizontal visibility on runway 14L threshold was 1,300 meters and vertical visibility was 200 feet. In flight, the flight computer failed and the crew continued the approach below minimums. Despite he was not able to establish a visual contact with the runway, the captain continued the approach and failed to initiate a go-around procedure. The aircraft descended below the glide, impacted trees and crashed in a dense wooded area located 1,450 metres short of runway. All eight occupants were injured, three seriously. The aircraft was destroyed.

For unknown reasons, the aircraft landed hard at Jeffersonville-Clark County Airport. There were no injuries among the people on board and the aircraft was damaged beyond repair due to severe damages to the left wing and the tail section.

Exin Co was operating An-26B for regular cargo flight between Tallinn and Helsinki. The crew performed last maintenance check in Tallinn on previous day and made uneventful flight to Helsinki on 17th March afternoon. Next morning the aircraft took off from Helsinki for regular flight EXN3589 to Tallinn at 09:46 local time. The takeoff weight was 23,954 kg, 46 kg below the MTOW. Four crewmembers, company mechanic and one cargo attendant were on board. During takeoff crew used RU 19-300 APU for additional thrust as prescribed in AFM. The RU 19-300 was shot down after takeoff. The flight was uneventful until 08:14:50, 9.5 nm from the runway 26. When power levers were retarded to flight idle crew noticed engine vibration and smelled a smoke in the cockpit. The engine chip detector indicator in the cockpit was lit. After short discussion about which engine should be shot down the flight engineer shot down the left engine and the captain tried to start the RU19A-300 (APU) to gain more thrust. During the approach the air traffic controller noticed the aircraft deviation from the approach path to the left and notified the crew. According to the FDR and CVR data the crew was unable to maintain a proper approach path both in lateral and vertical dimensions. The attempts to start RU19A-300 engine failed. Visual contact with the RWY was established 0.5 nm from the threshold. The aircraft crossed the airport boundary being not configured for landing and with IAS 295-300 km/h. The flaps were extended for 10˚ over the threshold; the landing gear was lowered after passing the RWY threshold and retracted again. The aircraft made a high speed low path over the runway on ca 10-15 feet altitude with the landing gear traveling down and up again. Flaps were extended over runway, and then retracted again seconds before impact. At the end of the RWY the full power on right engine was selected, aircraft climbed 15-20 feet and started turning left. Crew started retracting flaps and lowered landing gear. Aircraft crossed the highway at the end of the RWY on altitude ca 30 feet, then descended again, collided with the treetops at the lake shore and made crash-landing on the snow and ice-covered lake waterline. Due to the thick ice the aircraft remained on the ice and glided 151 m on the ice with heading 238˚ before coming to full stop. After the impact the flight engineer shoot down the RH engine and power and released all engine fire extinguishers. All persons onboard escaped immediately through the main door. No emergency was declares and despite suggestions from FO go-around was not commanded.

After landing at Port Harcourt Airport, the aircraft skidded then veered off runway and came to rest. All 52 occupants were rescued, among them 10 were slightly injured. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair. All passengers were members of the intervention group taking part to a disaster response operation.

On final approach to Bosaso Airport, the crew encountered poor weather conditions when the aircraft crashed short of runway. Both pilots escaped with minor injuries and the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The pilot of the single-engine turboprop was on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight and cancelled his IFR flight plan after being cleared for a visual approach to the destination airport. He flew a left traffic pattern for runway 32, a 4,202-foot-long, 75-foot-wide, asphalt runway. The pilot reported that the airplane crossed the runway threshold at 81 knots and touched down normally, with the stall warning horn sounding. The airplane subsequently drifted left and the pilot attempted to correct with right rudder input; however, the airplane continued to drift to the left side of the runway. The pilot then initiated a go-around and cognizant of risk of torque roll at low speeds did not apply full power. The airplane climbed to about 10 feet above the ground. At that time, the airplane was in a 20-degree left bank and the pilot applied full right aileron input to correct. The airplane then descended in a left turn, the pilot retarded the throttle, and braced for impact. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector reported that the airplane traveled about 100 feet off the left side of the runway, nosed down in mud, and came to rest in trees. Examination of the wreckage by the inspector did not reveal any preimpact mechanical malfunctions, nor did the pilot report any. The reported wind, about the time of the accident, was from 310 degrees at 10 knots, gusting to 15 knots.

The twin engine aircraft was performing a special flight from Tobalaba to Concepción with a team of five experts from the Santo Tomás University. While descending to Concepción-Carriel Sur Airport in poor weather conditions, the twin engine aircraft hit tree tops and crashed in a wooded area located some 20 km north of the airport, near Tomé. All six occupants were killed. They should inspect installations in Concepción following the earthquake from 27FEB2010.
Pilot:
Marcelo Ruiz.
Passengers:
Ernesto Videla,
Pablo Desbordes,
Ignacio Fernández,
Rodolfo Becker,
Guillermo Moya.

While approaching Bagram AFB, the crew did not obtain the three green lights when the undercarriage were lowered. The left main gear signal appears to remain red. The captain obtained the authorization to make two low passes over the airport then ATC confirmed that all three gears were down. The final approach was completed at low speed and after touchdown, while braking, the left main gear collapsed. The aircraft veered off runway to the left and came to rest some 2 km past the runway threshold. All five crewmen were unhurt while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

After landing at Mwanza Airport, the crew encountered control problems. The aircraft deviated to the left then veered off runway. While contacting soft ground, the nose gear collapsed and the aircraft came to rest near a taxiway. All 80 occupants escaped uninjured while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The airplane was on an instrument flight in night instrument meteorological conditions approaching the destination airport. The pilot contacted the approach control facility by radio and was subsequently cleared for an instrument landing system (ILS) approach to the destination airport. During the approach, the air traffic approach controller advised the pilot twice that the airplane was to the right of the approach course. The controller suggested a left turn of 5 to 7 degrees to the pilot. Once the airplane was back on the inbound course, the approach controller instructed the pilot to contact a tower controller. The pilot never contacted the tower controller, but later reestablished contact with the approach controller, who provided radar vectors for a second attempt at the ILS approach. During the second approach, the controller again advised the pilot that the airplane was to the right of the approach course and provided the pilot a low altitude alert. The airplane then started a climb and a turn back toward the inbound course. The controller advised the pilot that the airplane would intercept the inbound course at the locator outer marker (LOM) for the approach and asked if the pilot would like to abort the approach and try again. The pilot declined and responded that he would continue the approach. No further transmissions were received from the pilot. The airplane impacted a building about 0.4 nautical miles from the LOM. The building and airplane were almost completely consumed by the postimpact fire. A postaccident examination revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunction or failure. The airplane's turning ground track and the challenging visibility conditions were conducive to the onset of pilot spatial disorientation.