Plain, Valley

The twin engine airplane departed Dire Dawa in the morning on a flight to Harar Meda Airbase located in Debre Zeit, carrying 15 Army officers and three civilians on behalf of the Ethiopian Army. While descending to Harar Meda, the airplane crashed in unknown circumstances in a wooded area located in Mojo, some 17 km southeast of the airfield. The aircraft was totally destroyed and all 18 occupants were killed, among them two children. Operated on behalf of the Ethiopian Army with dual registration ET-AIU/808.

On August 10, 2018, about 2043 Pacific daylight time, a De Havilland DHC-8-402, N449QX, was destroyed when it impacted trees on Ketron Island, near Steilacoom, WA. The noncertificated pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was registered to Horizon Air Industries, Inc,. and was being operated by the noncertificated pilot as an unauthorized flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed in the area at the time of the event, and no flight plan was filed. The airplane departed from the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Seattle, Washington, about 1932. Horizon Air personnel reported that the noncertificated pilot was employed as a ground service agent and had access to the airplanes on the ramp. The investigation of this event is being conducted under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The NTSB provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The NTSB does not plan to issue an investigative report or open a public docket.

The crew was engaged in an agricultural mission in an area located about 32 km northeast of Tongjiang. After takeoff, the engine failed and the airplane crash landed in a paddy field. Both crew members escaped uninjured and the airplane was damaged beyond repair.

The single engine aircraft departed a remote area located 250 km west of Tura, carrying five passengers and two pilots who were returning from a fishing camp. Shortly after takeoff, at a height of one meter, the engine started to vibrate and the crew noticed a 'pop' noise. The airplane descended and the crew positioned the flaps to 40°. The aircraft passed over the river then impacted the opposite bank and crashed. All seven occupants evacuated safely, except the pilot who was slightly injured. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The pilot was conducting an on-demand air taxi flight in a float-equipped airplane from a seaplane base on a public lake to a remote lakeside home, with a passenger and her young son. The passenger brought cargo to transport as well, including an unexpected 800 lbs of mortar bags. Witnesses who labored to push the airplane out after loading reported that the airplane appeared very aft heavy and the pilot said he would offload "cement blocks" if he could not take off. A review of witness videos revealed that the pilot attempted one takeoff using only 3/4 of the available waterway, then step taxied around the lake and performed a step-taxi takeoff, again not using the full length of the lake. The airplane eventually lifted off, and barely climbed over trees on the south end of the lake, before descending and impacting terrain. A home surveillance video that captured the airplane seconds before the crash revealed that 3 seconds before ground impact, the estimated altitude of the airplane was 115 ft above ground level (agl) and the groundspeed was about 64 miles per hour (mph), which was low and much slower than normal climb speed (80 mph). As the airplane banked to the left to turn on course, it rolled through 90° likely experiencing an aerodynamic stall. Analysis of the engine rpm sound revealed that the engine was operating near maximum continuous power up until impact, and a postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. A calculation performed by investigators postaccident revealed the airplane's estimated gross weight at the time of the accident was 75 lbs over the approved maximum gross takeoff weight, and the airplane's estimated center of gravity was 1.76 inches aft of the rear limit. The pilot had been recently hired by the operator and he flew his first commercial flight in the same make and model, float-equipped airplane the week before the accident. He had accumulated 12.9 flight hours, and 13 sea landings/takeoffs in the accident model airplane since being hired as a part-time pilot. Although the airplane was able to takeoff, the aircraft's out-of-limit weight-and-balance condition increased its stall speed and degraded its climb performance, stability, and slow-flight characteristics. When the pilot turned the airplane left, the critical angle of attack was exceeded resulting in an aerodynamic stall at low altitude. If the pilot had performed a proper weight and balance calculation, he may have recognized the airplane was overweight and out of balance and should not have attempted the flight without making a load adjustment.

About five minutes after takeoff from Antananarivo-Ivato Airport, the twin engine aircraft went out of control and crashed in an open field located in Ampangabe, some 10 km southwest of the airfield. The aircraft was totally destroyed upon impact and all five occupants were killed. They were engaged in a training flight with one instructor and two pilots under instruction on board.
Crew:
Claude Albert Ranaivoarison, pilot.
Passengers:
Eddie Charles Razafindrakoto, General of the Madagascar Air Force,
Andy Razafindrakoto, son of the General,
Kevin Razafimanantsoa, pilot trainee,
Mamy Tahiana Andrianarijaona, pilot trainee.

The crew was completing a crop spraying flight in Băleni and was spraying insecticides on fields. While passing from a field to an other, the crew failed to realize his altitude was insufficient when, passing over a road, the airplane struck the roof of a truck. Out of control, the airplane crash landed in a field and came to rest, bursting into flames. Both pilots were injured and the aircraft was destroyed by a post crash fire.

The airplane manufacturer was conducting spin flight testing for the installation of a cargo pod when the airplane exhibited aberrant behavior and the testing was halted. The chief design engineer (CDE) was consulted, and, to provide a margin of safety for further flights, a forward center of gravity position was authorized for flaps up and flaps takeoff entries to gain more insight into the airplane's behavior on the previous flight. At the final briefing, before the next flight, the flight crew added spins with flaps in the landing configuration (flaps landing) into the test plan without the CDE's consultation or authorization. According to the pilot flying, after two wings-level, power on, flaps landing spins with left rudder and right aileron, a third spin entry was flown in the same configuration except that the entry was from a 30° left-bank turn. The airplane entered a normal spin, and, at one turn, flight controls were inputted for a normal recovery; however, the airplane settled into a fully developed spin. When recovery attempts failed, the decision was made to deploy the anti-spin parachute. After repeated unsuccessful attempts to deploy the anti-spin parachute, and when the airplane's altitude reached about 500 ft above the briefed minimum bailout altitude, both pilots called for and executed a bailout. The airplane impacted the ground and was destroyed. A postaccident examination of the anti-spin parachute system revealed that half of the connector hook had opened, which allowed the activation pin lanyard for the anti-spin parachute to become disengaged. Based on the airplane's previous aberrant behavior and the conservative parameters that the CDE had previously set, it is not likely that the CDE would have authorized abused spin entries without a prior testing buildup to those entries. Thus, the flight crew made an inappropriate decision to introduce flaps landing entry spin testing, and the failure of the anti-spin parachute contributed to the accident.

The twin engine aircraft crashed in unknown circumstances in an open field located near Génova. The aircraft came to rest upside down and both occupants were killed. It is understood that the registration was false as N113FT is officially attributed to a Piper PA-46 according to the FAA. Thus, it is believed that the flight was illegal.

Before the air taxi flight, the commercial pilot obtained a weather briefing via the company computer system and reviewed the weather information with the company chief pilot. The pilot stated that based on the computer briefing, which did not include icing conditions, he was aware of the forecasted weather conditions along the route of flight and at the intended destination. However, the briefing was incomplete as it did not contain any in-flight weather advisories, which would have alerted the pilot of moderate icing conditions expected over the flight route in the form of AIRMET Zulu. After takeoff and during the climb to 12,000 ft mean sea level (msl), the airplane encountered light rime ice, and the pilot activated the de-ice equipment with no issues noted. After hearing reports of better weather at a lower altitude, the pilot requested a descent to between 5,000 and 6,000 ft. During the descent to 6,000 ft msl and with the airplane clear of ice, the airplane encountered light to moderate icing conditions. The pilot considered turning back to another airport but could not get clearance until the airplane was closer to his destination. Shortly thereafter, the pilot stated that it felt “like a sheet of ice fell on us” as the airplane encountered severe icing conditions. The pilot applied full engine power in an attempt to maintain altitude. The airplane exited the overcast cloud layer about 500 ft above ground level. The pilot chose to execute an off-airport emergency landing because the airplane could not maintain altitude. During the landing, the landing gear separated; the airplane came to rest upright and sustained substantial damage to the wings and fuselage. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation and that the airplane was within its maximum gross weight. Structural icing was observed on the airframe after the landing. Based on the weather information, which indicated the probability of icing between 5,000 and 9,000 ft over the region and a high threat of supercooled large droplets between 5,000 and 7,000 ft, it is likely that the airplane, which was equipped for flight in icing conditions, inadvertently encountered severe icing conditions consistent with supercooled large droplets, which resulted in structural icing that exceeded the airplane’s capabilities to maintain altitude.