Takeoff (climb)

The student pilot, who was the new owner of the multi-engine airplane, and a private pilot flew commercially to Lubbock, Texas, utilized a ride-hailing service to drive to Portales, New Mexico; they met with the former owner of the airplane to finalize the purchase of the airplane and flew it back to Georgia the same day. The next day, the student pilot commenced flight training with the private pilot who offered to provide flight instruction to the student pilot in the student pilot’s newly acquired multi-engine airplane, even though he did not possess a flight instructor’s rating or a multi-engine airplane rating. Radar data showed that the track of the accident airplane's route consisted of their departure airport, a midway stop, and the third leg of the flight, where it crashed during the approach to their destination airport. Witnesses observed a sharp right turn before the airplane’s spiraling descent and impact with terrain and unoccupied semi-trailers. Surveillance footage from a parking lot security camera captured the airplane in a right spiral turn just before the accident. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces and the postimpact fire. The postaccident examination of the airframe, engines, and propellers revealed no anomalies that would preclude normal engine and airplane performance. Additionally, a review of the maintenance logbook revealed that the airplane was overdue for its annual maintenance inspection; no special flight permit (ferry permit) was obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for its return flight to Georgia. Toxicological testing of the student pilot revealed the presence amphetamine, a prescription Schedule II controlled substance that may result in cognitive deficits that pose a risk to aviation safety; however, its effect, if any on the accident flight could not be determined. It is likely that the private pilot’s failure to maintain aircraft control was exacerbated by his lack of a multi-engine airplane rating, his lack of a flight instructor rating, and his poor decision making.

The single engine airplane departed Port-au-Prince-Toussaint Louverture Airport on a private flight to Jacmel, some 45 km southwest of the capital city. On board were four passengers and one pilot. During climbout, the pilot encountered problems and the airplane lost height until it collided with a truck and crashed on a road located in Carrefour, some 12 km southwest of Port-au-Prince Airport. A passenger was seriously injured while four other occupants as well as the truck driver were killed. The aircraft was destroyed. The only survivor died from his injuries few hours later.

The airplane had recently undergone an annual inspection, and the pilot planned to fly the airplane back to his home base. After receiving clearance from air traffic control, the pilot proceeded to take off. The airplane accelerated and reached a peak groundspeed of 81 kts about 2,075 ft down the 4,097-ft runway. Once airborne, the airplane drifted slightly to the right and the pilot radioed an urgent need to return to the airport. The controller cleared the airplane to land and no further transmissions were received from the accident airplane. The airplane’s flight path showed that it slowed before turning back toward the left and the airplane’s speed continued to decrease throughout the remainder of the data. The final data point recorded the airplane at a groundspeed of 45 kts. The groundspeed would equate to 60 kts airspeed when considering the 15-kt headwind. The stall speed chart for the airplane listed the minimum stall speed for any configuration as 64 kts. Postaccident examinations of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. External and internal engine damage indicated that the engine was producing power at the time of impact, but the amount of power output could not be determined. Based on the available information, the pilot perceived an urgent need to return the airplane to the airport; however, due to the amount of damage from the impact and postimpact fire, the reason that the pilot was returning to the airport could not be determined. Stall speed information for the airplane, the recorded winds, and flight track data, indicated that the airplane encountered an aerodynamic stall before impacting the ground near the departure end of the runway. Since the airplane stalled and impacted the ground before reaching the perimeter of the airport, the pilot may not have had sufficient altitude to execute a forced landing to the empty field off the departure end of the runway.

Shortly after takeoff from Koryaki, en route to Tymlat, the crew lost control of the airplane that crashed in a wooded and snow covered area located one km from Koryaki, bursting into flames. The aircraft was totally destroyed by a post crash fire and both pilots were killed.

Shortly after takeoff from Nazca-María Reiche Neuman Airport, while in initial climb, the pilot lost control of the single engine airplane that crashed on a dirt road, bursting into flames. The aircraft was destroyed by impact forces and a post crash fire and all seven occupants were killed. They were completing a local sightseeing flight.

Shortly after departure, the engine lost total power and the pilot was forced to ditch in open water; the occupants egressed and were subsequently rescued by a recreational vessel. Examination of the engine revealed a fracture hole near the n°2 cylinder, which was likely the result of the n°2 cylinder connecting rod fracturing in fatigue as a result of high heat and high stress associated with failure of the n°2 bearing. The fatigue fracture displayed multiple origins consistent with relatively high cyclic stress, which likely occurred as excessive clearances developed between the bearing and the crankshaft journal. The n°2 connecting rod bearing may have failed due to a material defect in the bearing itself or due to a disruption in the oil lubrication supply to the bearing/journal interface. Either situation can cause similar damage patterns to develop, including excessive heating and subsequent bearing failure.

The airplane was departing into instrument meteorological conditions using a standard instrument departure. The takeoff instructions consisted of making a climbing right turn direct to a nondirectional beacon. After departing, the pilot made a radio communication to an air traffic controller asking if he will tell him when to turn. The controller replied that he would not be calling his turn and that the pilot should fly the departure as published making a climbing right turn to overfly the approach end of the runway. The pilot acknowledged the communication, which was his last transmission. The airplane made a 360° turn and descended below the cloud layer. The airplane then climbed back into the cloud layer and made an inverted loop, descending into the ground in a near-vertical attitude. A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed no evidence of preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures. Recorded audio of the airplane before the accident was consistent with the engines operating. The signatures on both propellers were consistent with one another and consistent with the engines operating at a similar rpm. The pilot was qualified and recently underwent recurrent training. The reasons the pilot became spatially disoriented could not definitely determined. The pilot left the anti-collision lights on while in the clouds, which may have resulted in him having flicker vertigo.

The airplane departed Juba Airport Runway 13 at 1233LT on a cargo flight to Maban, carrying five crew members and a load consisting of 28 drums of diesel. Three minutes after takeoff, while climbing, the crew declared an emergency. One minute later, the entered an uncontrolled descent and crashed less than 2 km past the runway end, bursting into flames. The aircraft was destroyed and all five occupants were killed. Registration and MSN to be confirmed. It is believed that the aircraft was operated on behalf of Euro Airlines.

The captain (who was the pilot flying) initiated the takeoff roll, and the airplane accelerated normally. According to the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript, the first officer made the “V1” and then “rotate” callouts. According to the captain (in a postaccident interview), when he pulled back on the control column to rotate the airplane, “nothing happened,” and the control column felt like it “was in concrete” and “frozen.” The CVR captured that the first officer subsequently made the “V2” callout, then the captain said “come on” in a strained voice. Both pilots recalled in postaccident interviews that they both attempted to pull back on the controls, but the airplane did not rotate. The CVR captured that the first officer called out “abort.” The first officer pulled the thrust levers to idle and applied the brakes, and the captain deployed the thrust reversers. (See “Execution of Rejected Takeoff” for more information.) The airplane overran the departure end of the runway and continued through the airport perimeter fence and across a road, striking electrical distribution lines and trees before coming to rest in a pasture, where a postcrash fire ensued. The pilots, two additional crewmembers, and all passengers evacuated the airplane. Two passengers received serious injuries, and one received a minor injury. The airplane was totally destroyed by a post crash fire.

Shortly after takeoff from Tapachula Airport Runway 05, while in initial climb, the pilot reported engine problems when control was lost. The aircraft crashed in a mango plantation. The aircraft was totally destroyed by impact forces and the pilot, sole on board, was killed.