Country
code

Western Australia

Crash of a Boeing 737-3H4 in the Fitzgerald River National Park

Date & Time: Feb 6, 2023 at 1614 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
N619SW
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Busselton - Busselton
MSN:
28035/2762
YOM:
1995
Flight number:
Bomber 139
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Captain / Total flying hours:
8233
Captain / Total hours on type:
1399.00
Copilot / Total flying hours:
5852
Copilot / Total hours on type:
128
Aircraft flight hours:
69187
Circumstances:
The air tanker, callsign Bomber 139, departed from Busselton Airport, Western Australia (WA) on a firefighting task to Fitzgerald River National Park, WA. There were 2 pilots on board, the aircraft captain in the left seat as the pilot flying and a copilot in the right seat as the pilot monitoring. At about 1614, during the go-around from a second partial retardant drop, the aircraft impacted a ridgeline at an elevation of about 222 ft and subsequently crashed, bursting into flames. The pilots suffered minor injuries and the aircraft was destroyed by a post crash fire.
Probable cause:
The ATSB found that the accident drop was conducted at a low height and airspeed downhill, which required the use of idle thrust and a high descent rate. The delay in the engines reaching go-around thrust at the end of the drop resulted in the aircraft’s height and airspeed (energy state) decaying as it approached rising terrain, which was not expected or detected by the pilot flying. Consequently, the aircraft’s airspeed and thrust were insufficient to climb above a ridgeline in the exit path, which resulted in a controlled flight into terrain. The operator’s practice of recalculating, and lowering, their target drop speed after a partial load drop also contributed to the low energy state of the aircraft leading up to the collision with terrain.
The ATSB also found that the operator and tasking agency had not published a minimum drop height, which resulted in the copilot, who did not believe there was a minimum drop height, not making any announcements about the low energy state prior to the collision. The ATSB found the operator’s pilot monitoring duties were reactive to the development of a low energy state and did
not include call-outs either before or at the minimum target parameters to reduce the risk of a low energy state developing.
The ATSB benchmarked the WA, New South Wales and National Aerial Firefighting Centre standards against the United States Forest Service and United States National Wildfire Coordinating Group standards and found inconsistencies between the Australian agencies’ standards but not among the United States agencies’ standards. This was likely a result of each Australian state participating in the LAT program independently producing their own standards.
Final Report:

Ground fire of a GippsAero GA8 Airvan in Gibb River

Date & Time: Apr 22, 2017 at 1255 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-AJZ
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Derby - Gibb River
MSN:
GA8-05-96
YOM:
2005
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
2
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
On 22 April 2017, a Gippsland Aeronautics GA-8 aircraft, registered VH-AJZ, was being used to conduct incendiary bombing aerial work operations in the Prince Regent River area of northern Western Australia (WA). On board were a pilot, a navigator seated in the co-pilot seat and a bombardier in the rear of the aircraft cabin. While conducting the incendiary bombing operations, the bombardier advised the pilot that he was suffering from motion sickness. The pilot elected to land at Gibb River aircraft landing area (ALA), WA, to take a lunch break and provide the bombardier with time to recover from the motion sickness. At about 1255 Western Standard Time (WST), the aircraft landed on runway 07 at Gibb River. During the landing roll, the engine failed. The aircraft had sufficient momentum to enable the pilot to turn the aircraft around on the runway and begin to taxi to the parking area at the western end of runway 07. Shortly after turning around, the aircraft came to rest on the runway. The pilot attempted to restart the engine, but the engine did not start. The pilot waited about 10–20 seconds before again attempting to restart the engine. While attempting the second restart of the engine, the pilot heard a loud noise similar to that of a backfire. The navigator then observed flames and smoke coming from around the front of the engine and immediately notified the pilot. After being notified of the fire, the pilot immediately shut down the engine and switched off the aircraft electrical system. As the pilot switched off the aircraft electrical system, the navigator located the aircraft fire extinguisher and evacuated from the aircraft through the co-pilot door. After evacuating from the aircraft, the navigator observed fire on the aircraft nose wheel. The navigator had difficulty preparing the fire extinguisher for use and was unable to discharge the fire extinguisher onto the fire. While the navigator was attempting to extinguish the fire, the pilot exited the aircraft through the pilot door and assisted the bombardier to exit the aircraft. After assisting the bombardier, the pilot moved to the front of the aircraft to assist the navigator with the firefighting. The pilot was able to activate the fire extinguisher and extinguished the fire on the nose wheel. The pilot observed fire continuing to burn within the engine compartment. Due to the heat of the fire, the pilot was unable to access the engine compartment to extinguish this fire. The pilot determined that no more could be done to contain the fire, and therefore, the pilot, navigator and bombardier moved clear of the aircraft to a safe location as the fire continued. The crew members were not injured. As a result of the fire, the aircraft was destroyed.
Probable cause:
These findings should not be read as apportioning blame or liability to any particular organisation or individual.
- The cause of the engine failure and fire could not be determined.
- After the fire was identified, two steps in the emergency procedure were omitted. This included not closing the fuel shutoff valve, which likely resulted in the fire not being extinguished and subsequently intensifying.
Final Report:

Crash of a Grumman G-73 Mallard in Perth: 2 killed

Date & Time: Jan 26, 2017 at 1708 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-CQA
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
No
Schedule:
Serpentine - Serpentine
MSN:
J-35
YOM:
1948
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
2
Captain / Total flying hours:
625
Captain / Total hours on type:
180.00
Circumstances:
On 26 January 2017, the pilot of a Grumman American Aviation Corp G-73 amphibian aircraft, registered VH-CQA (CQA), was participating in an air display as part of the City of Perth Australia Day Skyworks event. On board were the pilot and a passenger. The pilot of CQA was flying ‘in company’ with a Cessna Caravan amphibian and was conducting operations over Perth Water on the Swan River, that included low-level passes of the Langley Park foreshore. After conducting two passes in company, both aircraft departed the display area. The pilot of CQA subsequently requested and received approval to conduct a third pass, and returned to the display area without the Cessna Caravan. During positioning for the third pass, the aircraft departed controlled flight and collided with the water. The pilot and passenger were fatally injured.
Probable cause:
From the evidence available, the following findings are made regarding the loss of control and collision with water involving the G-73 Mallard aircraft, registered VH-CQA 10 km west-south-west of Perth Airport, Western Australia on 26 January 2017. These findings should not be read as apportioning blame or liability to any particular organisation or individual. Safety issues, or system problems, are highlighted in bold to emphasise their importance. A safety issue is an event or condition that increases safety risk and (a) can reasonably be regarded as having the potential to adversely affect the safety of future operations, and (b) is a characteristic of an organisation or a system, rather than a characteristic of a specific individual, or characteristic of an operating environment at a specific point in time.
Contributing factors:
- The pilot returned the aircraft to the display area for a third pass in a manner contrary to the approved inbound procedure and which required the use of increased manoeuvring within a confined area to establish the aircraft on the display path.
- During the final positioning turn for the third pass, the aircraft aerodynamically stalled at an unrecoverable height.
- The pilot's decision to carry a passenger on a flight during the air display was contrary to the Instrument of Approval issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority for this air display and increased the severity of the accident consequence.
Final Report:

Crash of a Cessna 208B Grand Caravan in Beagle Bay

Date & Time: Jan 14, 2010 at 0645 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-NTQ
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Broome - Koolan Island
MSN:
208B-0635
YOM:
1997
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
The aircraft departed Broome on a charter flight to Koolan Island, WA. At about 0645 Western Standard Time1, when the aircraft was at an altitude of about 9,500 feet, the pilot noticed a drop in the engine torque indication with a corresponding drop in the engine oil pressure indication. The pilot increased the power lever setting but the engine torque and oil indications continued to reduce, all other engine indications were normal. During an interview with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) the pilot stated that he felt a power loss associated with the drop in indicated engine torque. The pilot diverted to the nearest airstrip, which was Beagle Bay, WA. He stated that the low oil pressure warning light illuminated so he shut the engine down and prepared for an emergency landing. The pilot reported that on the final approach to the airstrip he realized that the aircraft was too high and its airspeed was too fast. The aircraft touched down about mid way along the runway and overran the end of the runway by about 200 metres. The aircraft impacted a mound of dirt, coming to rest upside down. The pilot, who was the only occupant sustained minor injuries. Examination of the aircraft by a third party and inspection of the photographs taken of the accident site, revealed that the engine, left main gear and nose gear had separated from the airframe during the accident sequence. There was a significant amount of oil present on the underside of the aircraft, indicating that the oil had leaked from the engine during operation. The
engine was removed from the accident site as an assembly by a third party. The propeller was removed and the engine was shipped to an engine overhaul facility where a disassembly and
examination was conducted under the supervision of the ATSB.
Probable cause:
From the evidence available it was evident that the engine had a substantial in-flight oil leak, which necessitated the in-flight shut down of the engine and a diversion to the nearest available airstrip. The accident damage to the engine in the area of the apparent oil leak precluded a conclusive finding as to the source of the leak. Although the detailed examination of the oil tube attachment lug fracture surfaces was inconclusive, the oil tube remained the most likely source of the oil leak. Evidence from other oil tube failures indicated that significant vibratory loading can cause the oil tube attachment lugs to fracture in the manner observed in the oil tube fitted to VH-NTQ. There was no evidence that the transfer tube was subjected to vibration from a compressor turbine or power turbine blade failure or of an incorrectly fitted engine mount. There was also no evidence of a pre-accident defect that would have caused a reduction in actual engine torque.
Final Report:

Crash of a Beechcraft 200 Super King Air in Perth

Date & Time: Apr 9, 2007 at 1703 LT
Operator:
Registration:
VH-SGT
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Perth - Mount Hale
MSN:
BB-73
YOM:
1975
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
9
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
On 9 April 2007, at 1703 Western Standard Time (WST), the main landing gear from a Beech Super King Air 200 aircraft, registered VH-SGT, collapsed on landing at Perth airport. Approximately two hours earlier, the aircraft was chartered to fly from Perth to Mount Hale, WA when shortly after takeoff from Perth the aircraft experienced a malfunction of the landing gear system. The main wheels and nose gear had become jammed and were unable to fully retract when selected up by the pilot. The pilot completed the emergency checklist actions contained in the Aircraft Flight Manual, but was unable to retract or extend the gear using either the automated control or the manual emergency system. The pilot then requested assistance from a passenger to operate the manual emergency extension system. The landing gear remained jammed despite the additional force applied to the lever from the passenger. The pilot contacted air traffic services and requested further assistance from company engineering personnel to visually assess the extension state of the landing gear. Two aerodrome passes were completed throughout the troubleshooting exercise and the pilot remained in radio contact with both groups during this phase. Following the flyovers and after holding over Rottnest Island at 5,000 ft for a period of approximately two hours, the pilot flew the King Air back to Perth airport. With the gear still jammed in the partially retracted position, both the left and right main landing gear assemblies collapsed after the aircraft touched down on Runway 24. The aircraft was substantially damaged as a result of the collapse (Figure 1). The airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (RFF) services and other relevant agencies had been alerted and were waiting in response when the King Air landed. No injuries were sustained by the pilot or any of the nine passengers on board.
Probable cause:
From the evidence available, the investigation revealed that two major system components had failed which could have prevented the Beechcraft Super King Air 200 landing gear from properly retracting after takeoff. The following findings with respect to those failed landing gear system components should not be read as apportioning blame or liability to any particular organisation or individual.
Contributing safety factors:
• The left torque tube support bearing had not been lubricated and had seized due to the accumulation of dirt and grit contaminants that had migrated from the external service environment and into the bearing.
• The geared components within the right main landing gear actuator prematurely failed.
Other safety factors:
• The aircraft manufacturer’s maintenance manual contained insufficient instruction or guidance for operators and maintainers of Super King Air 200 aircraft for the lubrication of the landing gear torque tube support bearings.
Other key findings:
• Both component assemblies were integral to the function and normal operation of the Super King Air 200 mechanical landing gear system. A break down of either component assembly would have prevented any attempt by the pilot to retract or extend the aircraft’s main landing gear. However, while either failure could have produced the landing gear difficulties sustained, the investigation was not able to determine which mechanism was the principal contributor to the event.
• The investigation was unable to conclusively establish why the geared components within the right main landing gear actuator had prematurely failed.
• The lower thrust bearing within the right main landing gear actuator had been correctly installed.
Final Report:

Crash of a Partenavia P.68B Victor off Rottnest Island

Date & Time: Nov 12, 2006 at 1500 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-IYK
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Rottnest Island - Perth
MSN:
138
YOM:
1978
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
5
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
Shortly after takeoff from Rottnest Island Airport, while in initial climb, the twin engine aircraft suffered a bird strike and crashed in a salt lake located near the airport. The aircraft was destroyed upon impact and all six occupants were injured.
Probable cause:
Loss of control during initial climb following a bird strike.

Crash of a Cessna 421C Golden Eagle III in El Questro: 2 killed

Date & Time: Aug 30, 2004 at 1200 LT
Operator:
Registration:
HB-LRW
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
No
Schedule:
El Questro – Broome
MSN:
421C-0633
YOM:
1974
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
2
Captain / Total flying hours:
2128
Captain / Total hours on type:
975.00
Aircraft flight hours:
3254
Circumstances:
On 30 August 2004, shortly before 1200 Western Standard Time, the owner-pilot of a twin-engine Cessna Aircraft Company 421C Golden Eagle (C421) aircraft, registered HB-LRW, commenced his takeoff from runway 32 at El Questro Aircraft Landing Area (ALA). The private flight was to Broome, where the pilot intended resuming the aircraft delivery flight from Switzerland to Perth. The available documentation indicated that the flight segments en route to Australia had all been to international or major aerodromes. The pilot of a Cessna Aircraft Company 210 (C210) and his two passengers in the runway 32 parking area witnessed the takeoff. Those witnesses reported that the C421 pilot carried out a pre-flight inspection of the aircraft prior to boarding for the takeoff. During that inspection, he was observed preparing for, and conducting a fuel drain check under the left wing, and to have removed some weed-like material from the right main wheel. He then loaded a small amount of personal luggage into the aircraft cabin, before he and the sole passenger boarded. The C210 pilot witness, who reported having observed a number of twin-engine aircraft operations at another aerodrome, did not comment on the nature of the pilot's start and engines run-up checks. The passenger witnesses reported that the pilot of the C421 made a number of unsuccessful attempts to start the left engine, before reverting to starting the right engine. He then started the left engine and moved the aircraft clear of the C210 in order to conduct his engine run-up checks. The passenger witnesses reported that during those checks they heard a 'frequency vibration' as the C421 pilot manipulated the engines' controls. The witnesses at the parking area reported that the C421 pilot taxied the aircraft onto the runway and applied power to commence a rolling takeoff. They, together with a hearing witness located to the north of the ALA indicated that the engines sounded 'normal' throughout the takeoff. Witnesses who observed the takeoff reported that the aircraft accelerated away 'briskly'. The pilot witness stated that the take-off roll and lift-off from the runway appeared similar to other twin-engine aircraft takeoffs that he had observed. The witnesses at the parking area also stated that, shortly after lift-off from the runway, the aircraft banked slightly to the left at an estimated 10 to 15 degrees angle of bank and drifted left before striking the trees along the side of the runway and impacting the ground. There was no report of any objects falling from the aircraft, or of any smoke or vapour emanating from the aircraft during the takeoff. The aircraft was destroyed by the impact forces and post-impact fire. The pilot and passenger were fatally injured.
Probable cause:
For reasons that could not be determined, the aircraft commenced a slight left angle of bank and drifted left after lift-off at a height from which the pilot was unable to recover prior to striking trees to the left of the runway.
Final Report:

Crash of a Cessna 404 Titan II in Jandakot: 2 killed

Date & Time: Aug 11, 2003 at 1537 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-ANV
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Jandakot - Jandakot
MSN:
404-0820
YOM:
1981
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
5
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
2
Captain / Total flying hours:
16722
Captain / Total hours on type:
12345.00
Aircraft flight hours:
16819
Circumstances:
The aircraft took off from runway 24 right (24R) at Jandakot Airport, WA. One pilot and five passengers were on board the aircraft. The flight was being conducted in the aerial work category, under the instrument flight rules. Shortly after the aircraft became airborne, while still over the runway, the pilot recognized symptoms that he associated with a failure of the right engine and elected to continue the takeoff. The pilot retracted the landing gear, selected the wing flaps to the up position and feathered the propeller of the right engine. The pilot later reported that he was concerned about clearing a residential area and obstructions along the flight path ahead, including high-voltage powerlines crossing the aircraft’s flight path 2,400 m beyond the runway. The aircraft was approximately 450 m beyond the upwind threshold of runway 24R when the pilot initiated a series of left turns. Analysis of radar records indicated that during the turns, the airspeed of the aircraft reduced significantly below the airspeed required for optimum single-engine performance. The pilot transmitted to the aerodrome controller that he was returning for a landing and indicated an intention to land on runway 30. However, the airspeed decayed during the subsequent manoeuvring such that he was unable to safely complete the approach to that runway. The pilot was unable to maintain altitude and the aircraft descended into an area of scrub-type terrain, moderately populated with trees. During the impact sequence at about 1537, the outboard portion of the left wing collided with a tree trunk and was sheared off. A significant quantity of fuel was spilled from the wing’s fuel tank and ignited. An intense postimpact fire broke out in the vicinity of the wreckage and destroyed the aircraft. Four passengers and the pilot vacated the aircraft, but sustained serious burns in the process. One of those passengers died from those injuries 85 days after the accident. A fifth passenger did not survive the post-impact fire.
Probable cause:
Significant factors:
1. The material specification contained in the engineering order for replacing the pump bushing of the engine driven fuel pump (EDFP) fitted to the right engine was not appropriate.
2. High torsional loads between the EDFP’s spindle shaft and the sleeve bearing sheared the pump’s drive shaft during a critical phase of flight.
3. The reduction in fuel pressure was insufficient to sustain operation of the engine at the take-off power setting.
4. The loss of engine power occurred close to the decision speed with the landing gear extended while the aircraft was over the runway.
5. The pilot elected to continue the takeoff.
6. The aircraft was manoeuvred, including turns and banks, at low altitude resulting in a decrease in airspeed below that required to maximise one-engine inoperative performance.
7. The pilot was unable to maintain the aircraft’s altitude over terrain that was unsuitable for an emergency landing.
Final Report:

Crash of a Beechcraft 70 Queen Air in Leonora

Date & Time: Jun 24, 2000 at 1740 LT
Type of aircraft:
Registration:
VH-MWJ
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Leonora – Laverton
MSN:
LB-29
YOM:
1970
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
5
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
The Beechcraft Queen Air and Rockwell Aero Commander were being used by a company to conduct private category passenger-carrying flights to transport its workers from Leonora to Laverton in Western Australia. The Aero Commander had departed and was established in the Leonora circuit area when the Queen Air took off. The pilot and one of the passengers of the Queen Air reported the take-off roll appeared normal until the aircraft crossed the runway intersection, when they felt a bump in the aircraft. The pilot reported hearing a loud bang and noticed that the inboard cowl of the right engine had opened. He also reported that he believed he had insufficient runway remaining to stop safely, so he continued the takeoff. The cowl separated from the aircraft at the time, or just after the pilot rotated the aircraft to the take-off attitude. He reported that although the aircraft had left the ground after the rotation, it then would not climb. The aircraft remained at almost treetop level until the pilot and front-seat passenger noticed the side of a tailings dump immediately in front of the aircraft. The pilot said that he pulled the control column fully back. The aircraft hit the hillside parallel to the slope of the embankment, with little forward speed. The impact destroyed the aircraft. Although the occupants sustained serious injuries, they evacuated the aircraft without external assistance. There was no post-impact fire. The aircraft-mounted emergency locator transmitter (ELT) did not activate.
Probable cause:
The examination of the Queen Air wreckage found no mechanical fault that may have contributed to the accident sequence other than the inboard cowl of the right engine detaching during the takeoff. The cowl latching mechanisms appeared to have been capable of operating normally. The two top hinges failing in overload associated with the lack of cowl latch damage suggested that the cowl was probably improperly secured before takeoff. The cowl appeared to have subsequently opened when it experienced the jolt when the aircraft crossed the runway intersection. The lack of any further cowl damage indicated that it detached cleanly and consequently its dislodgment should not have adversely affected the flying qualities of the aircraft.
Final Report:

Crash of a Britten-Norman BN-2A-26 Islander off Cocos Islands: 3 killed

Date & Time: Jan 16, 1999 at 1430 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
VH-XFF
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Horn Island - Cocos Islands
MSN:
763
YOM:
1975
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
3
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
3
Captain / Total flying hours:
2540
Captain / Total hours on type:
197.00
Aircraft flight cycles:
16775
Circumstances:
Uzu Air conducted passenger and freight operations between Horn Island and the island communities in the Torres Strait. It operated single-engine Cessna models 206 and 208 aircraft, and twin-engine Britten Norman Islander aircraft. On the morning of the accident, the pilot flew a company Cessna 206 aircraft from Horn Island to Yam, Coconut, and Badu Islands, and then returned to Horn Island. The total flight time was about 93 minutes. The pilot's schedule during the afternoon was to fly from Horn Island to Coconut, Yam, York, and Coconut Islands and then back to Horn Island, departing at 1330 eastern standard time. The flight was to be conducted in Islander, VH-XFF. Three passengers and about 130 kg freight were to be carried on the Horn Island - Coconut Island sector. Another company pilot had completed three flights in XFF earlier in the day for a total of 1.9 hours. He reported that the aircraft operated normally. Witnesses at Horn Island reported that the preparation for the flight, and the subsequent departure of the aircraft at 1350, proceeded normally. The pilot of another company aircraft heard the pilot of XFF report 15 NM SW of Coconut Island at 3,500 ft. A few minutes later, the pilot reported downwind for runway 27 at Coconut Island. Both transmissions sounded normal. Three members of the Coconut Island community reported that, at about 1410, they were on the beach at the eastern extremity of the island, about 250 m from the runway threshold and close to the extended runway centreline. Their recollections of the progress of the aircraft in the Coconut Island circuit are as follows: the aircraft joined the downwind leg and flew a left circuit for runway 27; the aircraft appeared to fly a normal approach until it passed over their position at an altitude of 200-300 ft; and it then veered left and commenced a shallow climb before suddenly rolling right and descending steeply onto a tidal flat, about 30 m seaward from the high-water mark, and about 200 m from their position. A passenger was seriously injured while three other occupants were killed.
Probable cause:
The following findings were identified:
- The pilot initiated a go-around from final approach because of a vehicle on the airstrip.
- The left propeller showed little evidence of rotation damage. The reason for a possible loss of left engine power could not be determined.
- For reasons that could not be established, the pilot lost control of the aircraft at a low height.
Final Report: