Airport (less than 10 km from airport)

On final approach to Doro Airport, while performing a cargo flight, the aircraft impacted ground short of runway and came to rest. All three crew members escaped uninjured while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The aircraft was carrying 50 passengers and a crew of five from Juba to Wau. After landing, the left main gear collapsed. The aircraft skidded on the 2,175 metres long and unpaved runway, veered off and came to rest with its nose gear torn off. While all five crew members were injured, all 50 passengers escaped uninjured. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair. The airport reported that the first part of runway 09 was closed due to work in progress since three months. It appears from various sources that the airline reported there was no NOTAM indicating the work in progress to resurface the runway and tower did not advise about the work in progress, too. Due to the slope of the runway it was impossible to see the workers on the runway in time. After landing, the aircraft impacted obstacles and went out of control.

After the pilot finished the preflight inspection in the hangar, the maintenance technician pulled the airplane out of the hangar and connected the auxiliary power cart to the airplane. Shortly thereafter, the pilot boarded the airplane and proceeded with the normal checklist. The pilot signaled to the maintenance technician to disconnect the power cart. The maintenance technician subsequently signaled that the pilot was clear to start the engines. After departure, the pilot noted a problem with the landing gear, and, after establishing that the tow bar was, most likely, still attached to the nosewheel, he diverted to a nearby airport for a precautionary landing. During the landing, the nose landing gear collapsed and the primary structure in the nose of the airplane was substantially damaged.

A witness reported that the airplane veered left during the takeoff roll and headed toward a large ditch that surrounded the runway. It appeared that the pilot did not attempt to stop the airplane or abort the takeoff. The airplane continued toward the ditch, and, upon reaching the ditch's edge, the airplane rotated and reached an altitude of about 50 feet. The airplane's left wing collided with trees. The airplane rolled left and then right before stalling and crashing. The pilot stated that the airplane seemed to pull left on takeoff, possibly due to a right quartering tailwind, and that he did not realize where he was positioned on the runway. Examination of the airplane and engine did not reveal any preimpact anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.

Following an uneventful cargo flight from Christiansted-Henry E. Rohlsen Airport, the crew completed the landing normally at San Juan-Luis Muñoz Marin Airport. While taxiing to the ramp, the nose gear collapsed and the aircraft came to rest. Both pilots escaped uninjured and the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The pilot was not familiar with the mountain airport. The airplane was high during the first visual approach to the runway. The pilot performed a go-around and the airplane was again high for the second approach. During the second approach, the approach angle steepened, and the airplane pitched nose-down toward the runway. The nosegear touched down about halfway down the runway followed by main gear touchdown. The airplane then bounced and the sound of engine noise increased as the airplane banked right and the right wing contacted the ground. The airplane subsequently flipped over and off the right side of the runway, and a postcrash fire ensued. Examination of the airframe and engines did not reveal any preimpact mechanical malfunctions. The examination also revealed that the right engine thrust reverser was deployed during the impact sequence, and the left engine thrust reverser was stowed. Although manufacturer data revealed single-engine reversing has been demonstrated during normal landings and is easily controllable, the airplane had already porpoised and bounced during the landing. The pilot’s subsequent activation of only the right engine’s thrust reverser would have created an asymmetrical thrust and most likely exacerbated an already uncontrolled touchdown. Had the touchdown been controlled, the airplane could have stopped on the remaining runway or the pilot could have performed a go-around uneventfully.

The twin engine aircraft was operating a taxi flight from Nassau-Lynden Pindling Airport to Deadmans Cay, and departed Nassau around 1 pm. On approach to Deadmans Cay, the crew encountered technical problems and was unable to lower the gear. The captain decided to perform a belly landing. The aircraft skidded on runway for several yards then veered off runway before coming to rest. There was no fire. While all occupants escaped uninjured, the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The airplane was on a business trip in Austria from Innsbruck via Salzburg to Linz. At 1816 hrs the airplane took off in Linz with two pilots and three passengers aboard; destination airport was to be Bratislava, Czech Republic. On the way to Bratislava a stopover in Egelsbach, Germany (EDFE) was planned; an additional passenger would board there. For the flight from Linz to Egelsbach a Y-flight plan was filed; it scheduled a flight according to Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) including an approach according to Visual Flight Rules (VFR). At 1824 hrs the airplane reached German airspace. The radio communication recorded by the air traffic service provider showed that the Cessna Citation 750 crew made the initial call to Langen Radar at 1836:54 hrs on frequency 120.575 MHz. At 1839:10 hrs the air traffic controller cleared a descent to Flight Level (FL) 140 after the identification of the airplane. Initially, the crew did not understand the instruction to fly a left turn toward SPESSART NDB and then later toward CHARLIE VOR. The Pilot in Command (PIC) apologized and let the controller know that he did not come here very often. At 1843:58 hrs a descent to 5,000 ft was instructed and the barometric air pressure QNH of 1,025 hPa passed. After "high speed approved" given by the controller the Citation 750 was passed on to Frankfurt Approach Control (136.125 MHz). At 1845:00 hrs the PIC made the initial call to Frankfurt Approach Control. He said he was in descent to 5,000 ft and did have the weather for Frankfurt. The controller issued a clearance for a visual approach at night (VFR Night) to Frankfurt-Egelsbach Airfield and asked him to report "Egelsbach in sight". The co-pilot acknowledged the clearance and that he would report "field in sight". The controller asked for a confirmation by the crew that it was indeed a VFR Night flight. About one minute later the controller asked the pilot if the IFR part had already been cancelled. The copilot answered "negative". The controller apologized and said it was his fault and he should continue his flight to CHARLIE. The controller added: “Disregard the VFR Night“. The crew made contact with the destination airport with VHF 2. The Aviation Supervision Office at Frankfurt-Egelsbach told the PIC that he could choose his landing direction. The crew received the information that runway 27 was easier to approach and that YANKEE ZWO was a good approach point. Afterwards the co-pilot said: “ … we’re proceeding direct to Egelsbach and we have just been talking to them we will take runway two seven for four miles final.” The controller advised of the “YANKEE inbound routing”; the pilot acknowledged with the reference that they were not yet flying VFR. The controller's information “ja however you may proceed YANKEE ONE“ was read back by the pilot with “YANKEE ONE“. The read-out of the Cockpit Voice Reorder (CFR) indicates that the crew had entered reporting point ECHO into the Flight Management System (FMS). The crew asked for a descent clearance to 4,000 ft which was granted at 1850:59 hrs. At 1851:36 hrs a descent for 3,000 ft was cleared. The pilot acknowledged the clearance with “…descend three thousand“; the controller answered: “….direct YANKEE ZWO für die zwo sieben“ (direct YANKEE ZWO for the two seven). After a further descent clearance to 2,500 ft, the controller asked at 1853:58 hrs if the pilot could cancel the IFR part. The co-pilot answered "affirmative". The controller confirmed the change from IFR to VFR with the time indication of 17:54 UTC. He added that the pilot should continue his descent to 1,500 ft or lower for the VFR Night flight and report airfield in sight. The pilot acknowledged that he would report back once he had the airfield in sight. Afterwards the PIC ordered “Flaps five“ which the co-pilot acknowledged with "Speed check. Flaps five selected“. According to the radar recording the airplane passed reporting point ECHO at 1854:42 hrs. The airplane passed YANKEE ONE to the south with a distance of 1.2 Nautical Miles (NM). The read-out of the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) data showed the airplane was in 2,800 ft AMSL at that time. The ground speed was about 285 kt with a rate of descent of 600 ft/min. Ten seconds after the PIC said “Okay. Let’s slow it down“ the flaps were set to 15° and the landing gear was extended. At that time the airplane was in about 1,770 ft AMSL with a brief rate of descent of 2,500 ft/min. At 1855:05 hrs the controller reported “…, field now eleven clock position, range six miles.“ The co-pilot answered that he had the airfield in sight after he had gotten the PIC's assurance. The airplane turned left to a heading of about 265°. At that time the rate of descent was about 600 ft/min and speed decreased further with 1 kt/s. At 18 55:16 hrs the last radio communication with Frankfurt Approach Control was “…. approved to leave any time …" which the co-pilot acknowledged. The co-pilot established radio contact with the Flugleiter of Egelsbach Airfield where he was asked to report airfield in sight. According to the recorded communication be-tween crew and Frankfurt-Egelsbach Info the runway lighting including the strobe lights were activated. The FDR recorded that at 1855:32 hrs the altitude select of the auto flight system was changed from 1,500 ft to 1,160 ft AMSL. The radar data showed that the on-request reporting point YANKEE TWO was passed at 1855:37 hrs in 1,530 ft AMSL with an airspeed of 175 kt. Based on the determined data the airplane was in about 820 ft AGL. At 1855:56 hrs the preselected altitude was reduced to 580 ft. The co-pilot's comment “….thousand feet above“ answered the PIC with “… and three miles to go only“. At 1856:06 hrs the radio altimeter reported “Five hundred“. The rate of descent was now 1,200 ft/min and increased in the following ten seconds up to 2,500 ft/min. The flaps drove from 15° to 35°. Two seconds after the radio altimeter the Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) generated the announcement "Sink rate, pull up, pull up, pull up, ...". Seven seconds after the beginning of the EGPWS warning the co-pilot said: “That’s five ….three hundred feet“. At 1856:08 hrs the EGPWS announced "...sink rate, too low, terrain, sink rate, terrain." The PIC asked "Terrain?" which the co-pilot answered with "Terrain!!!". At that moment an elevator deflection of up to 17° nose up occurred. The pitch increased from -4° to +20° within two seconds. At 1856:22 hrs the airplane collided with trees one second before the airplane reached the maximum pitch. At the time the autopilot was engaged. The engine parameter N1 (engine thrust) remained at 34% for both engines until the end of the recording. In the further course of the accident individual parts of the airplane were torn off by contact with trees. About 430 m after the initial tree contact the airplane impacted the ground. Prior to the impact the airplane had inverted itself. About 25 m prior to the ground impact both wings were torn-off by trees. The accident site was about 3.6 km (1.96 NM) from the threshold of runway 27 of Frankfurt-Egelsbach Airfield. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces and ensuing fire. Both pilots and the three passengers sustained fatal injuries.

The pilot was performing a positioning flight from Manaus-Aeroclube de Flores Airport to the international Airport of Manaus-Eduardo Gomes. Shortly after takeoff from runway 11 which is 860 metres long, the single engine aircraft failed to gain sufficient altitude. It collided with an electric pole, stalled and crashed in a wooded area. The pilot, sole occupant, was killed.

The pilot performed an instrument approach to the runway with an approaching winter storm. A review of on-board global positioning system (GPS) data indicated that the airplane flew through the approach course several times during the approach and was consistently below the glideslope path. The airplane continued below the published decision height altitude and drifted to the right of the runway’s extended centerline. The GPS recorded the pilot’s attempt to perform a missed approach, a rapid decrease in ground speed, and then the airplane descend to the ground, consistent with an aerodynamic stall. Further, the airplane owner, who was also a passenger on the flight, stated that, after the pilot made the two “left turning circles” and had begun a third circle, he perceived that the airplane “just stalled.” An examination of the airframe and engine did not detect any preimpact anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane’s anti-ice and propeller anti-ice switches were found in the “off” position. A review of weather information revealed that the airplane was operating in an area with the potential for moderate icing and snow. Based on the GPS data and weather information, it is likely that the airframe collected ice during the descent and approach, which affected the airplane’s performance and led to an aerodynamic stall during the climb.