Picton - Tiraora Lodge - Wellington

The flight was from Koromiko via Tiraora Lodge airstrip to Wellington. ZK-SFE took off from Koromiko with one pilot and five passengers at about 1620 hours. Three of the passengers were members of the pilot’s family. It was intended to make a stop at Tiraora Lodge airstrip to pick up additional passengers before proceeding to Wellington. Enroute to Tiraora Lodge, the aircraft encountered some turbulence from the westerly wind which was established aloft. The pilot flew the aircraft on a straight-in approach to Tiraora Lodge airstrip vector 26. Out on the bay wind gusts were disturbing the water but inshore the water was calm. There was no white water in the bay and the pilot assessed the surface wind speed as ten to fifteen knots. The sun was shining across the top of the ridge of hills which lay beyond the airstrip. As its azimuth was virtually the same as the runway direction the associated glare meant the pilot was unable to see the runway. However, the shadow of the ridge appeared to lie where the runway should have been so the pilot continued the landing approach expecting the aircraft would be in shadow when it was closer to the runway threshold and thus he would be able to see to make the landing. During the approach the aircraft encountered a downdraught which required the pilot to apply power to maintain the glidepath. The company’s missed approach procedure at Tiraora Lodge was to commence a level turn to the left 200 m from the threshold, the turn being sufficiently steep to be completed over the water. Thus the aircraft would not have to clear the trees, about 130 feet high, which surrounded the Lodge. The position from which the missed approach was to be commenced was not defined in terms of landmarks. The pilot elected to maintain a height of 200 feet on the approach reasoning that if he was unable to complete the landing, he would be able to turn above the trees which would therefore not be the limiting obstacle. By this stage, the aircraft’s indicated airspeed had been reduced to less than 88 knots and the pilot “toggled” the selector switch with the intention of setting landing flap (56°). When the pilot was able to see the airstrip he was abeam its lower end, to the right of the runway. The terrain ahead of him was uneven and divided by drainage ditches and deer fences. The overrun area beyond the runway precluded a safe arrival if the aircraft could not be stopped on the runway. A climb straight ahead was not possible due to the steep rise to a ridge at 2500 feet immediately beyond the end of the runway and high ground also prevented a turn to the right. However, a left turn seemed to offer an escape route as the ground in that direction rose less steeply. The pilot therefore commenced a missed approach to the left. He applied full power, selected flap towards “TAKE-OFF” and commenced a level turn. He had to descend the aircraft to keep it flying. Although the engines were delivering full power the performance of the aircraft was much less than he expected. Because he had been having problems with the flap actuation and indication system the pilot thought the flaps might not have retracted from the “LANDING” flap position to the “TAKE-OFF’’ position properly. On recollection, after the accident, he thought he may not have selected “LANDING” flap correctly during the approach and when he selected “TAKE-OFF” on the go-around the flaps travelled from “TAKE-OFF” to the 6° down position. Although he believed the flap position indicator to be unserviceable he did not check the position of the flaps themselves visually after either selection. Witnesses on the ground commented that the aircraft seemed to be affected by turbulence on the approach, was flying very slowly as it came level with the runway threshold and that it banked steeply when it commenced its turn. Although the pilot could not recollect hearing the stall warning horn, the passengers said that it came on and sounded continuously. During the missed approach the aircraft collided with a telephone line. When the pilot felt the drag of the telephone wire, he closed the throttles. Then, when he found the aircraft was still flying, he applied full power but the aircraft pitched nose up so he reduced the power again. The aircraft descended into the water at an angle of about 25° and then floated briefly on the surface of the bay. Although the pilot had attempted to flare the aircraft it was in a nose-down attitude on impact. All of the passengers escaped or were assisted from the aircraft and taken ashore to the Lodge for first aid and dry clothes. The accident took place in daylight at about 1635 hours NZST. The accident site was Northwest Bay, Pelorus Sound.

Flight / Schedule

Picton - Tiraora Lodge - Wellington

Registration

ZK-SFE

MSN

406

Year of Manufacture

1974

Operator

Soundsair

Date

March 19, 1989 at 04:35 PM

Type

CRASH

Flight Type

Charter/Taxi (Non Scheduled Revenue Flight)

Flight Phase

Landing (descent or approach)

Crash Site

Lake, Sea, Ocean, River

Crash Location

Tiraora Lodge Marlborough District Council

Region

Oceania • New Zealand

Crash Cause

Human factor

Narrative Report

On March 19, 1989 at 04:35 PM, Picton - Tiraora Lodge - Wellington experienced a crash involving Britten-Norman Islander, operated by Soundsair, with the event recorded near Tiraora Lodge Marlborough District Council.

The flight was categorized as charter/taxi (non scheduled revenue flight) and the reported phase was landing (descent or approach) at a lake, sea, ocean, river crash site.

6 people were known to be on board, 0 fatalities were recorded, 6 survivors were identified or estimated. This corresponds to an estimated fatality rate of 0.0%.

Crew on board: 1, crew fatalities: 0, passengers on board: 5, passenger fatalities: 0, other fatalities: 0.

The listed crash cause is human factor. The flight was from Koromiko via Tiraora Lodge airstrip to Wellington. ZK-SFE took off from Koromiko with one pilot and five passengers at about 1620 hours. Three of the passengers were members of the pilot’s family. It was intended to make a stop at Tiraora Lodge airstrip to pick up additional passengers before proceeding to Wellington. Enroute to Tiraora Lodge, the aircraft encountered some turbulence from the westerly wind which was established aloft. The pilot flew the aircraft on a straight-in approach to Tiraora Lodge airstrip vector 26. Out on the bay wind gusts were disturbing the water but inshore the water was calm. There was no white water in the bay and the pilot assessed the surface wind speed as ten to fifteen knots. The sun was shining across the top of the ridge of hills which lay beyond the airstrip. As its azimuth was virtually the same as the runway direction the associated glare meant the pilot was unable to see the runway. However, the shadow of the ridge appeared to lie where the runway should have been so the pilot continued the landing approach expecting the aircraft would be in shadow when it was closer to the runway threshold and thus he would be able to see to make the landing. During the approach the aircraft encountered a downdraught which required the pilot to apply power to maintain the glidepath. The company’s missed approach procedure at Tiraora Lodge was to commence a level turn to the left 200 m from the threshold, the turn being sufficiently steep to be completed over the water. Thus the aircraft would not have to clear the trees, about 130 feet high, which surrounded the Lodge. The position from which the missed approach was to be commenced was not defined in terms of landmarks. The pilot elected to maintain a height of 200 feet on the approach reasoning that if he was unable to complete the landing, he would be able to turn above the trees which would therefore not be the limiting obstacle. By this stage, the aircraft’s indicated airspeed had been reduced to less than 88 knots and the pilot “toggled” the selector switch with the intention of setting landing flap (56°). When the pilot was able to see the airstrip he was abeam its lower end, to the right of the runway. The terrain ahead of him was uneven and divided by drainage ditches and deer fences. The overrun area beyond the runway precluded a safe arrival if the aircraft could not be stopped on the runway. A climb straight ahead was not possible due to the steep rise to a ridge at 2500 feet immediately beyond the end of the runway and high ground also prevented a turn to the right. However, a left turn seemed to offer an escape route as the ground in that direction rose less steeply. The pilot therefore commenced a missed approach to the left. He applied full power, selected flap towards “TAKE-OFF” and commenced a level turn. He had to descend the aircraft to keep it flying. Although the engines were delivering full power the performance of the aircraft was much less than he expected. Because he had been having problems with the flap actuation and indication system the pilot thought the flaps might not have retracted from the “LANDING” flap position to the “TAKE-OFF’’ position properly. On recollection, after the accident, he thought he may not have selected “LANDING” flap correctly during the approach and when he selected “TAKE-OFF” on the go-around the flaps travelled from “TAKE-OFF” to the 6° down position. Although he believed the flap position indicator to be unserviceable he did not check the position of the flaps themselves visually after either selection. Witnesses on the ground commented that the aircraft seemed to be affected by turbulence on the approach, was flying very slowly as it came level with the runway threshold and that it banked steeply when it commenced its turn. Although the pilot could not recollect hearing the stall warning horn, the passengers said that it came on and sounded continuously. During the missed approach the aircraft collided with a telephone line. When the pilot felt the drag of the telephone wire, he closed the throttles. Then, when he found the aircraft was still flying, he applied full power but the aircraft pitched nose up so he reduced the power again. The aircraft descended into the water at an angle of about 25° and then floated briefly on the surface of the bay. Although the pilot had attempted to flare the aircraft it was in a nose-down attitude on impact. All of the passengers escaped or were assisted from the aircraft and taken ashore to the Lodge for first aid and dry clothes. The accident took place in daylight at about 1635 hours NZST. The accident site was Northwest Bay, Pelorus Sound.

Aircraft reference details include registration ZK-SFE, MSN 406, year of manufacture 1974.

Fatalities

Total

0

Crew

0

Passengers

0

Other

0

Crash Summary

The flight was from Koromiko via Tiraora Lodge airstrip to Wellington. ZK-SFE took off from Koromiko with one pilot and five passengers at about 1620 hours. Three of the passengers were members of the pilot’s family. It was intended to make a stop at Tiraora Lodge airstrip to pick up additional passengers before proceeding to Wellington. Enroute to Tiraora Lodge, the aircraft encountered some turbulence from the westerly wind which was established aloft. The pilot flew the aircraft on a straight-in approach to Tiraora Lodge airstrip vector 26. Out on the bay wind gusts were disturbing the water but inshore the water was calm. There was no white water in the bay and the pilot assessed the surface wind speed as ten to fifteen knots. The sun was shining across the top of the ridge of hills which lay beyond the airstrip. As its azimuth was virtually the same as the runway direction the associated glare meant the pilot was unable to see the runway. However, the shadow of the ridge appeared to lie where the runway should have been so the pilot continued the landing approach expecting the aircraft would be in shadow when it was closer to the runway threshold and thus he would be able to see to make the landing. During the approach the aircraft encountered a downdraught which required the pilot to apply power to maintain the glidepath. The company’s missed approach procedure at Tiraora Lodge was to commence a level turn to the left 200 m from the threshold, the turn being sufficiently steep to be completed over the water. Thus the aircraft would not have to clear the trees, about 130 feet high, which surrounded the Lodge. The position from which the missed approach was to be commenced was not defined in terms of landmarks. The pilot elected to maintain a height of 200 feet on the approach reasoning that if he was unable to complete the landing, he would be able to turn above the trees which would therefore not be the limiting obstacle. By this stage, the aircraft’s indicated airspeed had been reduced to less than 88 knots and the pilot “toggled” the selector switch with the intention of setting landing flap (56°). When the pilot was able to see the airstrip he was abeam its lower end, to the right of the runway. The terrain ahead of him was uneven and divided by drainage ditches and deer fences. The overrun area beyond the runway precluded a safe arrival if the aircraft could not be stopped on the runway. A climb straight ahead was not possible due to the steep rise to a ridge at 2500 feet immediately beyond the end of the runway and high ground also prevented a turn to the right. However, a left turn seemed to offer an escape route as the ground in that direction rose less steeply. The pilot therefore commenced a missed approach to the left. He applied full power, selected flap towards “TAKE-OFF” and commenced a level turn. He had to descend the aircraft to keep it flying. Although the engines were delivering full power the performance of the aircraft was much less than he expected. Because he had been having problems with the flap actuation and indication system the pilot thought the flaps might not have retracted from the “LANDING” flap position to the “TAKE-OFF’’ position properly. On recollection, after the accident, he thought he may not have selected “LANDING” flap correctly during the approach and when he selected “TAKE-OFF” on the go-around the flaps travelled from “TAKE-OFF” to the 6° down position. Although he believed the flap position indicator to be unserviceable he did not check the position of the flaps themselves visually after either selection. Witnesses on the ground commented that the aircraft seemed to be affected by turbulence on the approach, was flying very slowly as it came level with the runway threshold and that it banked steeply when it commenced its turn. Although the pilot could not recollect hearing the stall warning horn, the passengers said that it came on and sounded continuously. During the missed approach the aircraft collided with a telephone line. When the pilot felt the drag of the telephone wire, he closed the throttles. Then, when he found the aircraft was still flying, he applied full power but the aircraft pitched nose up so he reduced the power again. The aircraft descended into the water at an angle of about 25° and then floated briefly on the surface of the bay. Although the pilot had attempted to flare the aircraft it was in a nose-down attitude on impact. All of the passengers escaped or were assisted from the aircraft and taken ashore to the Lodge for first aid and dry clothes. The accident took place in daylight at about 1635 hours NZST. The accident site was Northwest Bay, Pelorus Sound.

Cause: Human factor

Occupants & Outcome

Crew On Board

1

Passengers On Board

5

Estimated Survivors

6

Fatality Rate

0.0%

Known people on board: 6

Operational Details

Schedule / Flight

Picton - Tiraora Lodge - Wellington

Operator

Soundsair

Flight Type

Charter/Taxi (Non Scheduled Revenue Flight)

Flight Phase

Landing (descent or approach)

Crash Site

Lake, Sea, Ocean, River

Region / Country

Oceania • New Zealand

Aircraft Details

Registration

ZK-SFE

MSN

406

Year of Manufacture

1974

Similar Plane Crashes

November 11, 1920 at 04:10 PM3 Fatalities

Walsh Brother's Flying School

Avro 504

The pilot was performing a sightseeing flight around New Plymouth. While approaching to land, the aircraft stalled and crashed near the aerodrome. All three occupants were killed. Crew: Captain Richard Russell, pilot Passengers: James Clarke, mayor of New Plymouth, Kathleen Warnock.

December 30, 1921 at 11:15 AM1 Fatalities

Canterbury Aviation

Avro 504

The pilot H. C. Grout was performing some demo flights in the region of Blenheim. After a stop in Kaikoura, he was positioning to his base in Christchurch. En route, the engine failed and he was forced to attempt an emergency landing. At low height, the airplane stalled and crashed in a wheat field near Motunau. Seriously injured, the pilot was evacuated to a local hospital but died from his injuries in the evening. The aircraft was destroyed.

February 17, 1924 at 12:00 AM

Canterbury Aviation

Avro 504

Crashed in unknown circumstances near Wigram AFB. There were no casualties.

July 7, 1928 at 12:00 AM

K. W. J. Hall

De Havilland DH.60 Moth

The single engine aircraft crashed in unknown circumstances in Waikari, north of Christchurch. The pilot and owner K. W. J. Hall was unhurt.

December 12, 1929 at 12:00 AM2 Fatalities

Aerial Services New Zealand

Dornier DO.12 Libelle

The crew was performing a local test flight out of Auckland when the engine misfired on approach. The seaplane stalled and crashed in the Mechanics Bay, off Milford Beach. The aircraft was destroyed and both occupants were killed. Crew: Don Harkness, pilot. Passenger: Charles Goldsbro.

May 21, 1930 at 04:25 PM2 Fatalities

Bryant House Airways

De Havilland DH.60 Moth

Captain A. W. Saunders was performing demo flights on the racecourse of Te Awamutu. With his passenger Alfred W. Minchin, he climbed to a height of 1,000 feet when the plane was seen to enter a spin. The spin was recovered from about 50 feet and the Moth was still diving when it impacted the ground. Both occupants were seriously injured and evacuated to the local hospital. While the passenger died from his injuries in the evening, the pilot died the following day. The aircraft was destroyed by impact forces.