Takeoff (climb)

The aircraft collided with a ditch during a precautionary landing after takeoff from Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport (SAV), Savannah, Georgia. The pilot and copilot sustained minor injuries, and the airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to Upper Deck Holdings, Inc. and was being operated by PlaneSense, Inc,. as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 positioning flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the flight to Blue Grass Airport (LEX), Lexington, Kentucky. The pilot in the left seat was the pilot monitoring and the copilot in the right seat was the pilot flying. The crew had the full length of the runway 1 available (7,002 ft) for takeoff. The pilots reported that the acceleration and takeoff was normal and after establishing a positive rate of climb, the crew received an auditory annunciation and a red crew alerting system (CAS) torque warning. The engine torque indicated 5.3 pounds per square inch (psi); the nominal torque value for the conditions that day was reported by the crew to be 43.3 psi. With about 2,700 ft of runway remaining while at an altitude of 200 ft msl, the copilot elected to land immediately; the copilot pushed the nose down and executed a 90° left descending turn and subsequently landed in the grass. Although he applied "hard" braking in an attempt to stop, the airplane impacted a drainage ditch, resulting in substantial impact damage and a postimpact fire. The pilot reported that, after takeoff, he observed a low torque CAS message and the copilot told him to "declare an emergency and run the checklist." The pilot confirmed that the landing gear were extended and the copilot turned the airplane to the left toward open ground between the runways and the terminal. About 60 seconds elapsed from the start of the takeoff roll until the accident. The airport was equipped with security cameras that captured the airplane from its initial climb through the landing and collision. One camera, pointed toward the west-southwest, recorded the airplane's left descending turn and its landing in the grass, followed by impact and smoke. A second camera, mounted on the control tower, pointed toward the southeast and showed the airplane during the initial climb before it leveled off and entered a descending left turn; it also showed the airplane land and roll through the grass before colliding with the ditch.

On the day of the accident, a line service technician had disconnected the airplane from a battery charger. After disconnecting the battery, he left the right access door open which provided access to the fuel control unit, fuses, fuel line, oil line, and battery charging port as he always did. He then towed the airplane from the hangar it was stored in, and parked it in front of the airport's terminal building. The three passengers arrived first, and then about 30 minutes later the pilot arrived. He uploaded his navigational charts and did a preflight check "which was normal." The engine start, taxi, and engine run up, were also normal. The wing flaps were set to 10°. After liftoff he "retracted the landing gear" and continued to climb. Shortly thereafter the right cowl door opened partially, and started "flopping" up and down 3 to 4 inches in each direction. He reduced the torque to try to prevent the right cowl door from coming completely open. However, when he turned on the left crosswind leg to return to the runway, the right cowl door opened completely, and the airplane would not maintain altitude even with full power, so he "put the nose back down." The airplane struck trees, and then pancaked, and slid sideways and came to rest, in the front yard of an abandoned house. The private pilot and one passenger received minor injuries. Two passengers received serious injuries, one of whom was found out of her seat, unconscious, on the floor of the airplane shortly after the accident, and died about 227 days later. During the investigation, it could not be determined, if she had properly used the restraint system, as it was found unlatched with the seatbelt portion of the assembly extended. Examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of any preimpact failures or malfunctions of the airplane or engine that would have precluded normal operation. It was discovered though, that the right access door had not been closed and latched by the pilot before takeoff, as examination of the right access door latches and clevis keepers found them to be functional, with no indication of overstress or deformation which would have been present if the access door had been forced open due to air loads in-flight, or during the impact sequence. Further examination also revealed that the battery charging port cover which was inside the compartment that the right access door allowed access to, had not been placed and secured over the battery charging port, indicating that the preflight inspection had not been properly completed. A checklist that was provided by a simulator training provider was found by the pilot's seat station. Examination of the checklist revealed that under the section titled: "EXTERIOR PREFLIGHT" only one item was listed which stated, "EXTERIOR PREFLIGHT…COMPLETE." It also stated on both sides of the checklist: "FOR SIMULATOR TRAINING PURPOSES ONLY." A copy of the airplane manufacturer's published pilot's operating handbook (POH) was found in a cabinet behind the pilot's seat where it was not accessible from the pilot's station. Review of the POH revealed that it contained detailed guidance regarding the preflight check of the airplane. Additionally, it was discovered that the landing gear was in the down and locked position which would have degraded the airplane's ability to accelerate and climb by producing excess drag, and indicated that the pilot had not retracted the landing gear as he thought he did, as the landing gear handle was still in the down position. Review of recorded data from the airplanes avionics system also indicated that the airplane had roughly followed the runway heading while climbing until it reached the end of the runway. The pilot had then entered a left turn and allowed the bank angle to increase to about 45°, and angle of attack to increase to about 8°, which caused the airspeed to decrease below the stalling speed (which would have been about 20% higher than normal due to the increased load factor from the steep turn) until the airplane entered an aerodynamic stall, indicating that the pilot allowed himself to become distracted by the open door, rather than maintaining control of the airplane. One of the seriously injured passenger passed away 227 days after the accident.

Beechcraft Super King Air B-200 aircraft, VT-BSA belonging to BSF Air Wing was involved in an accident on 22.12.2015 while operating a flight from IGI Airport, New Delhi to Ranchi. The flight was under the command of a CPL holder with another CPL holder as Second-in-Command. There were ten persons on board including two flight crew members. As per the scheduling procedure of the Operator, the flying programme for 22.12.2015 was approved by the ADG (Logistics) on the recommendation of the DIG (Air) for VT-BSA on 21.12.2015. The programme included names of the flight crew along with the following sectors: from Delhi to Ranchi ETD 0800 ETA 1030 and from Ranchi to Delhi ETD 1300 ETA 1600. The task was as per instructions on the subject dated 23rd July 2015. As per the weight & load data sheet there were 8 passengers with 20 Kgs. of baggage in the aft cabin compartment. The actual take-off weight shown was 5668.85 Kgs as against the maximum take-off weight of 5669.9 Kgs. Fuel uplifted was 1085 Kgs. The aircraft was taken out of hangar of the Operator at 0655 hrs on 22.12.2015 and parked outside the hangar for operating the subject flight. At around 0745 hrs, the passengers reached the aircraft who were mainly technical personnel supposed to carry out scheduled maintenance of Mi-17 helicopter of the Operator at Ranchi. They were carrying their personnel baggage along with tools and equipment required for the maintenance. At around 0915 hrs the flight crew contacted ATC Delhi and requested for clearance to operate the flight to Ranchi. The aircraft was cleared to Ranchi via R460 and FL210. Runway in use was given as 28. At 0918 hrs the doors were closed and the flight crew had started carrying out the check list. After the ATC issued taxi clearance, the aircraft had stopped for some time after commencing taxiing. The pilot informed the ATC that they will take 10 minutes delay for further taxi due to some administrative reasons. The taxi clearance was accordingly cancelled. After a halt of about 6 to 7 minutes, the pilot again requested the ATC for taxi clearance and the same was approved by the ATC. Thereafter, the aircraft was given take-off clearance from runway 28. The weather at the time of take-off was: Visibility 800 meters with Winds at 100°/03 knots. Shortly after take-off and attaining a height of approximately 400 feet AGL, the aircraft progressively turned left with simultaneous loss of height. It had taken a turn of approximately 180o and impacted some trees before hitting the outside perimeter road of the airport in a left bank attitude. Thereafter, it impacted 'head on' with the outside boundary wall of the airport. After breaking the outside boundary wall, the wings impacted two trees and the aircraft hit the holding tank of the water treatment plant. The tail portion and part of the fuselage overturned and went into the water tank. There was post impact fire and the portion of the aircraft outside the water tank was destroyed by fire. All passengers and crew received fatal injuries due impact and fire. The ELT was operated at 0410 hours UTC (0940 hours IST). The fire fighting team reached the site and extinguished the fire. The bodies were then recovered from the accident site. 08 bodies were recovered from the holding tank of the water treatment plant and bodies of both pilots were recovered from the heavily burnt portion of the cockpit lying adjacent (outside) to the wall of the holding tank of the water treatment tank.

The private pilot was conducting a personal cross-country flight. Shortly after takeoff, the pilot told the air traffic controller that he needed to return to the airport due to an attitude heading reference system (AHRS) "miscommunication." Air traffic control radar data indicated that, at that time, the airplane was about 1.75 miles north of the airport on a southeasterly course about 2,000 ft. mean sea level. About 20 seconds after the pilot requested to return to the airport, the airplane began to descend. The airplane subsequently entered a right turn, which appeared to continue until the final radar data point. The airplane struck power lines about 3/4 of a mile from the airport while maneuvering within the traffic pattern. The power lines were about 75 ft. above ground level. A postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Although the pilot reported a flight instrumentation issue to air traffic control, the investigation was unable to confirm whether such an anomaly occurred based on component testing and available information. Examination of the standby airspeed indicator revealed that the link arm had separated from the pin on the rocking shaft assembly; however, it likely separated during the accident sequence. No other anomalies were observed. Functional testing indicated that the standby airspeed indicator was likely functional and providing accurate airspeed information to the pilot throughout the flight. Finally, examination of the left and right annunciator panel bulb filaments associated with the left fuel pump advisory revealed that they were stretched, indicating that the left fuel pump advisory indication annunciated at the time of the accident; however, this likely occurred during the accident sequence as a result of an automatic attempt to activate the left fuel pump due to the loss of fuel pressure immediately after the left wing separated. Toxicology testing of the pilot detected low levels of three different sedating antihistamines; however, antemortem levels could not be determined nor could the underlying reason(s) for the pilot's use of these medications. As a result, it could not be determined whether pilot impairment occurred due to the use of the medications or the underlying condition(s) themselves. Although the pilot reported a flight instrumentation issue, this problem would not have affected his ability to control the airplane. Further, the pilot should have been able to see the power lines given the day/visual weather conditions. It is possible that the pilot become distracted by the noncritical anomaly, which resulted in his failure to maintain clearance from the power lines.

According to the pilot, he checked the winds via his onboard weather reporting device during the run-up, and he stated that the 25 knot wind sock was about ¾ full just moments before the takeoff roll. He reported that during the takeoff roll the airplane encountered a significant wind gust from the right. He stated that the wind gust forced the airplane to exit the left side of the runway, the landing gear collapsed, and the airplane collided with metal pylons which surrounded the wind sock. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings, fuselage, horizontal stabilizer and elevator. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical failures or anomalies prior to or during the flight that would have prevented normal flight operation. According to the Airport/Facility Directory, the Airport Remarks state: Airport located in mountainous terrain with occasional strong winds and turbulence. Lighted windsock available at runway ends and centerfield. With southerly crosswinds in excess of 15 knots, experiencing turbulence and possible windshear along first 3000´ of Runway 27. The reported wind at the airport during the time of the accident was from 200 degrees true at 22 knots, with gusts at 33 knots, and the departure runway heading was 27. According to the pilot operating hand book the maximum demonstrated crosswind component for this airplane is 17 knots. The crosswind component during the time of the accident was 26 knots.

The crew departed Guatemala City-La Aurora Airport on a local training flight. Shortly after takeoff from runway 02, while in initial climb, the aircraft entered a right turn then lost height and crashed near an industrial building located about 900 metres from the runway 20 threshold. The aircraft was destroyed by impact forces and a post crash fire. Both pilots escaped uninjured.

Shortly after takeoff from Acandí-Alcides Fernandez Airport, while in initial climb, the twin engine aircraft stalled and crashed in a house located in the district of Miramar, near the airport. The pilot and a passenger were killed and eight other occupants were injured. There were no victims on the ground and the aircraft was destroyed.

The crew was performing a flight from Malakal to Wau on behalf of the World Food Program. Shortly after takeoff, during initial climb, an unexpected situation forced the captain to attempt an emergency landing. The aircraft crash landed in a field past the runway end, slid for few dozen metres and came to rest, bursting into flames. All four crew members evacuated safely and the aircraft was totally destroyed by a post crash fire.

After takeoff from Juba Airport Runway 13, the four engine aircraft encountered difficulties to gain height. After a distance of some 800 metres, the aircraft impacted a hill and crashed on the shore of the White Nile. Two passengers were seriously injured while 41 other occupants were killed, among them all six crew members. Weather conditions at the time of the accident were marginal with rain showers. South Sudan Authorities reported the aircraft was unable to climb because it was overloaded, and the captain reported to ATC prior to departure he was carrying 12 passengers. According to Antonov, the aircraft was not airworthy at the time of the accident because its owner, Tajik Asia Airways, was not compliant with published procedures.

The aircraft departed Buenos Aires-San Fernando Airport on a positioning flight to Río Gallegos, carrying two pilots. During the takeoff roll, the copilot (pilot-in-command) noticed that the left engine N1 reached a value of 101% instead of 95% like the right engine. At that point the aircraft had already traveled 380 metres. As the aircraft started to veer to the right, the copilot decided to abandon the takeoff procedure without informing the captain. The power levers were brought back to idle and the copilot started to brake. After a course of about 980 metres, the right engine N1 value dropped to 30-40% while the left engine remained at 101%. Then the captain took over control, deployed briefly the thrust reverser system when the aircraft departed the runway to the right. While rolling in a grassy area, it struck a drainage ditch located 80 metres from the runway, lost its undercarriage then slid for few dozen metres before coming to rest, bursting into flames. Both pilots evacuated safely while the aircraft was destroyed by a post crash fire.