Crash of a PZL-Mielec AN-28 near Kedrovy

Date & Time: Jul 16, 2021 at 1611 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
RA-28728
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Kedrovy - Tomsk
MSN:
1AJ007-13
YOM:
1989
Flight number:
SL42
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
4
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
15
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Captain / Total flying hours:
7906
Captain / Total hours on type:
3970.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
181
Copilot / Total hours on type:
26
Aircraft flight hours:
8698
Aircraft flight cycles:
5921
Circumstances:
En route from Kedrovy to Tomsk, while cruising at an altitude of 12,000 feet in icing conditions, both engines failed simultaneously. The crew tried to restart both engines, without success. In such conditions, the crew reduced his altitude and attempted an emergency landing in the taiga. Upon impact, the flipped over and came to rest upside down. The wreckage was found around 1430LT some 52 km southeast of Kedrovy. All 17 occupants were found alive, among them few were injured. The captain broke one of his leg. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair.
Probable cause:
The accident of the An-28 aircraft, registration RA-28728, occurred during a forced landing on an improvised landing site due to the simultaneous shutdown of both engines while in flight. The need for this landing was triggered by the engines' spontaneous shutdown. The shutdown occurred while the aircraft was flying in icing conditions with the Pitot-Static System (POSS) turned off due to ice ingestion into its air intake.
The aviation incident was most likely influenced by the following factors:
- The crew's failure to follow the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) procedures for manually activating the POSS when meteorological conditions favored icing;
- Violation of the crew's duty and rest time regulations, which could have led to the accumulation of operational fatigue and contributed to missing the operation to activate the POSS;
- The crew's failure to make the decision to cease further performance of their duties due to the accumulation of operational fatigue in the absence of the airline's established procedures for exercising this crew right, which does not comply with the provisions of the Russian Ministry of Transport Order No. 139 dated November 21, 2005, "On Approval of the Regulation on Features of the Work and Rest Time Regime for Crew Members of Civil Aviation Aircraft in the Russian Federation";
- Increased hypoxia stress when flying at altitudes exceeding 3000 meters without the additional use of oxygen, which is a violation of the regulations of FAP-128, AFM, and the airline's internal regulations, and could have exacerbated the negative effects of operational fatigue;
- A malfunction in the ice detection sensor DSL-40T, which prevented the issuance of ice detection alerts and the automatic activation of the POSS.
Final Report:

Crash of an Antonov AN-26B-100 in Palana: 28 killed

Date & Time: Jul 6, 2021 at 1450 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
RA-26085
Survivors:
No
Schedule:
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky – Palana
MSN:
123 10
YOM:
1982
Flight number:
PTK251
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
6
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
22
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
28
Captain / Total flying hours:
3340
Captain / Total hours on type:
2885.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
1253
Copilot / Total hours on type:
1091
Aircraft flight hours:
21492
Aircraft flight cycles:
10498
Circumstances:
The aircraft departed Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Airport at 1257LT on a schedule service (flight PTK251) to Palana, carrying 22 passengers and a crew of six, among them Olga Mokhiriova, chief of the municipality of Palana. At 1439LT, the crew contacted Palana ATC and was cleared to start the descent. While completing an NDB approach to runway 29, the crew encountered marginal weather conditions with fog and ceiling at 300 metres. Too low, the aircraft impacted terrain about 4 km northwest of the airport. The wreckage was found in the evening on the top of a rocky wall. The aircraft disintegrated on impact and debris fall down on the sea bank. All 28 occupants were killed.
Probable cause:
The cause of the An-26B-100 RA-26085 aircraft crash was the crew's violation of the established instrument approach procedure to Palana aerodrome, which was manifested in flying with significant deviation from the set route and descent well below the established minimum descent height (MDH) under weather conditions that excluded stable visual contact with ground landmarks, leading to the collision of the aircraft with a coastal cliff in controlled flight, its destruction, and the death of the crew and passengers.
The following contributing factors were identified:
- The crew's failure to execute a missed approach with the acquisition of the established minimum safety altitude (MSA) when information about the bearing indicated a significant deviation of the aircraft from the established approach procedure;
- The absence in the Palana aerodrome dispatcher's work technology of actions in the presence of information about the bearing indicating a significant deviation of the aircraft from the established approach scheme, as well as the dispatcher's passivity when such information was available;
- The lack of warning signals from the early ground proximity warning system under conditions that should have triggered it. It is not possible to determine the reason for the absence of the warning signals;
- The overestimation of the barometric altimeter readings in the final phase of the flight due to the specific airflow around the steep coastline creating a low-pressure zone and the overestimation of the variometer readings, the cause of which cannot be determined.
Final Report:

Crash of a Lockheed C-130H Hercules in Jolo: 52 killed

Date & Time: Jul 4, 2021 at 1130 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
5125
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Cagayan de Oro - Jolo
MSN:
5125
YOM:
1988
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
8
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
88
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
52
Circumstances:
The four engine aircraft departed Cagayan de Oro Airport to transfer troops to Jolo. On board were 88 passengers and a crew of 8, including three pilots. After landing on runway 09 at Jolo Airport, the aircraft was unable to stop within the remaining distance. It overran, collided with several house and came to rest in a wooded area, bursting into flames. At least 49 occupants were killed as well as three people on the ground. All others were injured.

Crash of a Let L-410UVP-E in Tanay: 4 killed

Date & Time: Jun 19, 2021 at 1000 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
RF-94603
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Tanay - Tanay
MSN:
892328
YOM:
1989
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
17
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
4
Circumstances:
The twin engine aircraft was engaged in a local skydiving mission in Tanay, Kemerovo oblast. On board were 17 skydivers and two pilots. Shortly after takeoff, while in initial climb, the aircraft stalled and crashed in a grassy area. Both pilots and two passengers were killed while 15 other occupants were injured. The aircraft was totally destroyed. It is believed that the right engine suffered a power loss.

Crash of a Beechcraft 1900D in Pyin Oo Lwin: 12 killed

Date & Time: Jun 10, 2021
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
4610
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Naypyidaw – Pyin Oo Lwin
MSN:
UE-325
YOM:
1998
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
14
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
12
Circumstances:
The twin engine aircraft departed Naypyidaw on a flight to Pyin Oo Lwin, carrying 14 passengers and two pilots, among them high ranking officers and monks. On final approach to Pyin Oo Lwin-Anisakan Airport runway 21, the aircraft collided with obstacles and crashed near a steel plant located about 3 km short of runway threshold. A pilot and three passengers were injured while 12 other occupants were killed. Development will follow.

Crash of a Beechcraft B250GT Super King Air in Gwalior

Date & Time: May 6, 2021 at 2115 LT
Operator:
Registration:
VT-MPQ
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Indore - Gwalior
MSN:
BY-373
YOM:
2020
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Captain / Total flying hours:
12324
Captain / Total hours on type:
9362.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
5135
Copilot / Total hours on type:
50
Aircraft flight hours:
49
Circumstances:
Beechcraft Super King Air B200GT aircraft, VT-MPQ belonging to the Directorate of Aviation, Government of Madhya Pradesh (DoA,GoMP) was involved in an accident on 06.05.2021 while operating a flight from Indore Airport to Gwalior. The flight was under the command of an ATPL holder with another CPL holder as Co-Pilot. There was one passenger on board in addition. The flight crew contacted ATC Indore for clearance to operate the flight to Gwalior. The aircraft was cleared for Gwalior via airway W10N and FL270. Aircraft departed from RWY25 at Indore and climbed to FL 270. Aircraft descended into Gwalior in coordination with Delhi and Gwalior. Approaching Gwalior the crew were advised by the ATC that RWY24L was in use. ATC then asked the crew if they would like to carry out a VOR approach for the opposite RWY 06R. The crew requested for a visual approach for RWY 06R in the night time and were cleared to descend 2700 ft and called field in sight at 25 NM. Crew then requested for right base RWY 06R and were cleared to circuit altitude. Crew called turning right base with field visual and were cleared to land which the crew acknowledged. Just before landing the aircraft and short of the threshold, the main gear collided with the raised arrester barrier and came to a halt on the Runway 06R just beyond the threshold markings at 1515 UTC. The aircraft was substantially damaged, however there was no post impact fire. The 2 crew and 1 passenger received minor to serious injuries.
Probable cause:
The PIC (PF) carrying out a visual approach at night and knowingly deviated below the visual approach path profile (3°) while disregarding the PAPI indications, thereby the aircraft collided with the raised Arrester Barrier. Lack of assertiveness on the part of the copilot (PM).
The following contributing factors were identified:
- Non-Compliance to the SOP of “Change of Runway Checklist” by the ATC staff leading to the 'Arrester Barrier' remaining in a 'Raised Position' while the aircraft (VT-MPQ) came in for landing on runway 06R.
- Non-essential conversation by the flight crew during the final approach for landing causing distraction leading to a delayed sighting of the raised Arrester Barrier.
- Systemic failure at various levels at the Gwalior Air Force Base to ensure that the 'Arrester Barrier Position Indicator Lights and Integral Panel Lights' were not rectified in a stipulated time period.
- A robust alternate procedure was not defined when the 'Arrester Barrier Position Indicator Lights and Integral Panel Lights' were unserviceable.
- The Gwalior Airforce Base authorities did not install 'Red Obstacle Lights' on the Arrester Barrier Poles to indicate the position of the obstacle on the date of the accident as per the DGCA requirements (CAR Section 4, Series B, Part 1).
Final Report:

Crash of a Partenavia P.68C Observer 2 in Bhopal

Date & Time: Mar 27, 2021 at 1605 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VT-TAA
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Bhopal - Guna
MSN:
398-07-OB2
YOM:
1994
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Captain / Total flying hours:
772
Captain / Total hours on type:
472.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
458
Copilot / Total hours on type:
220
Aircraft flight hours:
2835
Circumstances:
The aircraft was under the command of a CPL holder pilot-in-command (PIC), who was Pilot Flying (PF). PIC was assisted by a CPL holder copilot, who was pilot monitoring (PM). One passenger (Director of Operations M/s PAPL) was also onboard. The aircraft took off from Bhopal airport uneventfully. After takeoff, at about 20 NM, the crew observed abnormal noise followed by low oil pressure and high oil temperature indication on aircraft’s LH engine. Crew assessed the situation and decided to turn back to Bhopal. The crew however, reported to ATC Bhopal that they are returning back due to wind and turbulence. While returning, crew shutdown the LH engine. Post LH engine shut down, crew gave a call to ATC, Bhopal requested to land the aircraft on the taxiway (disuse runway). ATC did not agree to the request, as there was no cross runway at Bhopal. The ATC was also not made aware of the prevailing emergency situation by the crew. When ATC declined the request, the crew informed ATC, that they might be doing force landing. ATC Bhopal immediately responded and asked the crew to land on Runway 12. However, the crew carried out a force landing in an agriculture field approximately 3 NM from Bhopal Airport. During the force landing, the PIC received serious injury and the copilot and passenger received minor injuries.The aircraft sustained substantial damages.
Probable cause:
The probable cause of the accident was Oil leak from the LH engine during the flight. Consequently, oil starvation and lack of lubrication resulted in excessive heat generation amongst the frictional components. Due to excessive heat, the bearing of no. 4 piston connecting rod failed and broke into pieces. However, the root cause of the LH engine oil leak could not be conclusively established. Subsequent to LH engine seizure, the crew did not follow the emergency procedures for single engine operation and took a decision to come for landing with single engine (RH). The crew further aggravated the emergency situation by not communicating the actual reason with ATC, displaying gross lack of situational awareness in handling the emergency. Crew estimated that they cannot reach the airport runway due to the low altitude and force landed the aircraft before the airport.
Final Report:

Crash of a Boeing 737-4Y0 in Jakarta

Date & Time: Mar 20, 2021 at 1126 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
PK-YSF
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Jakarta - Makassar
MSN:
23869/1639
YOM:
1988
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Captain / Total flying hours:
6228
Captain / Total hours on type:
5208.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
1255
Copilot / Total hours on type:
1084
Aircraft flight hours:
55982
Aircraft flight cycles:
65005
Circumstances:
On 20 March 2021, a Boeing 737-400F, registered PK-YSF, was being operated by Trigana Air Service on a non-schedule cargo flight from Halim Perdanakusuma International Airport (WIHH), Jakarta, Indonesia with intended destination of Sultan Hasanuddin International Airport (WAAA), South Sulawesi, Indonesia. On board in this flight was two pilots, one engineer and one Flight Operation Officer (FOO). According to the weight and balance sheet, the flight carried 16,672 kgs of general cargo, takeoff fuel of 11,100 kg and the takeoff weight was 60,695 kg (133,835 lbs). The Pilot in Command (PIC) acted as Pilot Flying (PF) and the Second in Command (SIC) acted as Pilot Monitoring (PM). At 0328 UTC (1028 LT), the PM requested clearance to Halim Tower controller (the controller) to pushback and start the engines. At 1031 LT, the PM requested to the controller for taxi clearance. There was no report of aircraft system abnormality prior to the aircraft departure. At 1047 LT, the controller issued clearance to the PK-YSF pilot to enter and to backtrack Runway 24. At 1051 LT, the PM reported ready for departure to the controller. The controller issued takeoff clearance with additional departure clearance that after takeoff, turn left to heading 180° and initially climb to altitude of 3,000 feet. The PM acknowledged the clearance. The takeoff was conducted with reduced takeoff thrust by assumed temperature of 40°C and the aircraft became airborne at 10:52:57 LT. At 1055 LT, the controller advised the pilot to report when established on heading 180°. The PM reported that they were experiencing right engine failure and requested to fly to AL NDB . The controller advised the PM to turn left heading 060° and to climb to 2,500 feet. Furthermore, the controller asked the pilot intention whether to hold over AL NDB or direct for landing approach. The PM replied that they would hold over AL NDB and added the information that no fire was detected. The controller issued clearance to fly to AL NDB at altitude of 2,500 feet. The controller assumed that PK-YSF would return to Halim and advised the Airport Rescue and Fire-Fighting (ARFF) personnel that PK-YSF experienced right engine failure and would return to Halim. At 1058 LT, the controller requested the information of time required for holding over AL NDB and was replied by the PM that holding would require about 15 minutes. Furthermore, the controller requested whether the pilot able to hold at a point about 15 to 20 Nm from AL NDB and was replied by the PM that they did not objection to the proposal. The controller instructed the pilot to maintain outbound heading up to 15 Nm, at altitude of 2,500 feet. This was intended by the controller to manage the departure and arrival aircraft to and from Halim. At 1116 LT, the PM reported that they were ready to turn left for approach. The controller advised the pilot to turn left and to intercept localizer of the Instrument Landing System (ILS) Runway 24. At 1125 LT, the PM reported to the controller that the Runway was in sight. The controller advised that the wind was from 060° at velocity of 6 knots, QNH 1,007 mbs and issued landing clearance. The aircraft touched down on the touchdown zone and shortly after, both wheels of the right main landing gear detached. The controller noticed spark appeared from the aircraft and pressed the crash bell. At 1127 LT, the controller informed pilots of the other aircraft that the runway blocked by the landing aircraft and identified fire on one of the engines. Few seconds later, the PM called the controller whether any fire and was replied by the controller that fire was visible on the left side of the aircraft.

Crash of an Antonov AN-26 in Almaty: 4 killed

Date & Time: Mar 13, 2021 at 1722 LT
Type of aircraft:
Registration:
02 white
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Nursultan - Almaty
MSN:
72 01
YOM:
1978
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
6
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
4
Circumstances:
Following an uneventful flight from Nursultan Nazarbayev Airport on behalf of the National Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the crew was approaching Almaty Airport runway 23R in marginal weather conditions with a ceiling at 300 feet and a visibility limited to 5 km in freezing drizzle. On short final, the aircraft struck the ground and crashed 600 metres short of runway, bursting into flames. Two crew members were rescued while four others were killed.
Those killed were:
Major Gabit Esimdaevich Barlykbayev,
Captain Doszhan Galymbekovich Baimuratov,
1st Lt Mukhtar Hadzhimukanovich Sagimbayev,
Sgt Vasilkov Evgeny Borisovich.

Crash of a Beechcraft 350ER Super King Air in Ji'an: 5 killed

Date & Time: Mar 1, 2021 at 1519 LT
Registration:
B-10GD
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
No
Site:
Schedule:
Ganzhou - Ganzhou
MSN:
FL-1014
YOM:
2015
Location:
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
3
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
5
Aircraft flight hours:
672
Aircraft flight cycles:
398
Circumstances:
The twin engine aircraft departed Ganzhou Airport at 1440LT on a cloud seeding mission over the Jiangxi Region. While flying in clouds, the aircraft entered an uncontrolled descent, entered a spin and eventually crashed in a residential area. All five occupants were killed and one people on the ground was slightly injured.
Probable cause:
Loss of control due to icing conditions. It was determined that the aircraft was flying in icy conditions for a long period of time during an artificial rainfall operation and the wings and propellers became seriously iced up. The aircraft was unable to effectively control the risk of icing, which resulted in the aircraft losing speed and entering a spin, eventually crashing to the ground and catching fire. Based on the casualties and damage to the aircraft, the incident constituted a major general aviation accident of aircraft crew origin. The investigation also found that the aircraft had been modified in such a way that the relevant data was not available and that the crew did not handle the spin properly.
Final Report: