Mitsubishi MU-2 Marquise

Dynamic Spine Solutions

Northshore Group

On May 4, 2021, about 2305 central daylight time, a Mitsubishi MU-2B-60 airplane, N322TA, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The pilot and two passengers were fatally injured. The airplane collided with a private residence; one occupant was fatally injured, and two other occupants sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. According to Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the flight departed Wichita Falls Municipal Airport (SPS), Wichita Falls, Texas, about 2057 and was en route to the Bobby L Chain Municipal Airport (HBG), Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The pilot had filed and activated an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan. The pilot requested and received clearance to fly the RNAV 13 approach to HBG. The airplane flew to the initial approach fix, performed the procedure turn, and flew a portion of the final approach course. The last ADS-B point was recorded at 2300 about 1.6 miles northwest from the accident site, at an altitude of 1,475 ft mean sea level (msl). An Alert Notification (ALNOT) was issued by air traffic control when the pilot did not provide a cancellation radio call as required after the instrument approach to a non-towered airport. At 2320, law enforcement received a 911 call reporting the accident. There were no radio distress calls recorded from the pilot. The airplane impacted the front section of an occupied residence about 2.2 miles from the approach end of runway 13. A post impact fire ensued and consumed a majority of the airplane and the residential structure. Cockpit instrumentation was mostly consumed by the post-impact fire. The flaps were found at 20° down, and landing gear was extended at the time of impact. According to FAA records, the pilot held a private pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single engine land, multiengine land, and instrument airplane. Documents provided by his MU-2 training facility revealed the pilot completed a flight review in the accident airplane on November 13, 2020, and completed Advisory Circular 91-89 approved MU-2 recurrent training on November 14, 2020. The pilot had purchased the airplane in February 2012. An associate of the pilot reported that the pilot owned a MU-2F model before he acquired the B model. On June 24, 2020, the pilot was issued a second-class medical certificate. On the medical certificate application, the pilot reported having accrued 7,834 total hours. The airplane was not equipped, and was not required to be equipped, with any type of crashresistant recorder device.

McNeely Charter Service

On June 7, 2020, about 0425 central daylight time, a Mitsubishi MU-2B airplane, N44MX, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135 cargo flight. The flight originated at Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field)(PAE), Everett, Washington, about 2115, and was originally destined for Huron Regional Airport (HON), Huron, South Dakota, for a fuel stop. However, preliminary air traffic control information and weather data was consistent with the pilot diverting to Joe Foss Field Airport (FSD), Sioux Falls, South Dakota, due to weather at HON at the time of intended arrival. The flight landed at FSD at 0140. The final destination was Kokomo Municipal Airport (OKK), Kokomo, Indiana.

RA Aircraft Management

The instrument-rated private pilot departed on a cross-country flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) with an overcast cloud layer at 500 ft above ground level (agl) and visibility restricted to 1 ¾ miles in mist, without receiving an instrument clearance or opening his filed instrument flight rules flight plan. There was an outage of the ground communications system at the airport and there was no evidence that the pilot attempted to open his flight plan via his cellular telephone. In addition, there was a low-level outage of the radar services in the vicinity of the accident site and investigators were unable to determine the airplane's route of flight before impact. The airport manager observed the accident airplane depart from runway 35 and enter the clouds. Witnesses located to the north of the accident site did not see the airplane but reported hearing an airplane depart about the time of the accident. One witness reported hearing a lowflying airplane and commented that the engines sounded as if they were operating at full power. The witness heard a thud as he was walking into his home but attributed it to a thunderstorm in the area. The airplane impacted a field about 3.5 miles to the northeast of the departure end of the runway and off the track for the intended route of flight. The airplane was massively fragmented during the impact and debris was scattered for about 300 ft. The damage to the airplane and ground scars at the accident site were consistent with the airplane impacting in a left wing low, nose low attitude with relatively high energy. A postaccident examination of the engines and propeller assemblies did not reveal any preimpact anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Signatures were consistent with both engines producing power and both propellers developing thrust at the time of impact. While the massive fragmentation precluded functional testing of the equipment, there was no damage or failure that suggested preimpact anomalies with the airframe or flight controls.Several days before the accident flight, the pilot encountered a "transient flag" on the air data attitude heading reference system. The pilot reported the flag to both the co-owner of the airplane and an avionics shop; however, exact details of the flag are not known. The unit was destroyed by impact forces and could not be functionally tested. If the flag affecting the display of attitude information had occurred with the unit after takeoff, the instrument panel had adequate stand-by instrumentation from which the pilot could have continued the flight. It is not known if this unit failed during the takeoff and investigators were unable to determine what role, if any, this transient issue may have played in the accident. Based upon the reported weather conditions, the location of the wreckage, and the attitude of the airplane at the time of impact with the ground, it is likely that the pilot experienced spatial disorientation shortly after takeoff which resulted in a loss of control and descent into terrain.

Aibal

Shortly after takeoff from San Fernando Airport in Buenos Aires, while in initial climb, the pilot was contacted by ATC about an apparent transponder issue. The crew did not respond when, few seconds later, the twin engine airplane entered an uncontrolled descent and crashed in a marshy area located in the delta of Paraná de la Palmas. The wreckage was found on August 19 about 17 km north of San Fernando Airport. The aircraft disintegrated on impact and all three occupants were killed. Crew: Matías Ronzano, Passengers: Emanuel Vega, Matías Aristi.

Ithaca Consulting

The commercial pilot and three passengers were making a personal cross-country flight over ocean waters in the MU-2B airplane. During cruise flight at flight level (FL) 240, the airplane maintained the same relative heading, airspeed, and altitude for about 2.5 hours before radar contact was lost. While the airplane was in flight, a significant meteorological information notice was issued that warned of frequent thunderstorms with tops to FL440 in the accident area at the accident time. Satellite imagery showed cloud tops in the area were up to FL400. Moderate or greater icing conditions and super cooled large drops (SLD) were likely near or over the accident area at the accident time. Although the wreckage was not located for examination, the loss of the airplane's radar target followed by the identification of debris and a fuel sheen on the water below the last radar target location suggests that the airplane entered an uncontrolled descent after encountering adverse weather and impacted the water. Before beginning training in the airplane about 4 months before the accident, the pilot had 21 hours of multi engine experience accumulated during sporadic flights over 9 years. Per a special federal aviation regulation, a pilot must complete specific ground and flight training and log a minimum of 100 flight hours as pilot-in-command (PIC) in multi engine airplanes before acting as PIC of a MU-2B airplane. Once the pilot began training in the airplane, he appeared to attempt to reach the 100-hour threshold quickly, flying about 50 hours in 1 month. These 50 hours included about 40 hours of long, cross-country flights that the flight instructor who was flying with the pilot described as "familiarization flights" for the pilot and "demonstration flights" for the airplane's owner. The pilot successfully completed the training required for the MU-2B, and at the time of the accident, he had accumulated an estimated 120 hours of multi engine flight experience of which 100 hours were in the MU-2B. Although an MU-2B instructor described the pilot as a good, attentive student, it cannot be determined if his training was ingrained enough for him to effectively apply it in an operational environment without an instructor present. Although available evidence about the pilot's activities suggested he may not have obtained adequate restorative sleep during the night before the accident, there was insufficient evidence to determine the extent to which fatigue played a role in his decision making or the sequence of events.The pilot's last known weather briefing occurred about 8 hours before the airplane departed, and it is not known if the pilot obtained any updated weather information before or during the flight. Sufficient weather information (including a hazardous weather advisory provided by an air traffic control broadcast message about 25 minutes before the accident) was available for the pilot to expect convective activity and the potential for icing along the accident flight's route; however, there is no evidence from the airplane's radar track or the pilot's communications with air traffic controllers that he recognized or attempted to avoid the convective conditions or exit icing conditions.

Aéro Teknic

The twin engine aircraft left Montreal-Saint-Hubert Airport at 0930LT for a two hours flight to Le Havre-aux-Maisons, on Magdalen Islands. Upon arrival, weather conditions were marginal with low ceiling, visibility up to two miles, rain and wind gusting to 30 knots. During the final approach to Runway 07, when the aircraft was 1.4 nautical miles west-southwest of the airport, it deviated south of the approach path. At approximately 1230 Atlantic Daylight Time, aircraft control was lost, resulting in the aircraft striking the ground in a near-level attitude. The aircraft was destroyed and all seven occupants were killed, among them Jean Lapierre, political commentator and former Liberal federal cabinet minister of Transport. All passengers were flying to Magdalen Islands to the funeral of Lapierre's father, who died last Friday. The captain, Pascal Gosselin, was the founder and owner of Aéro Teknic. Crew: Pascal Gosselin, pilot. Passengers: Fabrice Labourel, acting as a copilot, Jean Lapierre, Nicole Beaulieu, Jean Lapierre's wife, Martine Lapierre, Jean Lapierre's sister, Marc Lapierre, Jean Lapierre's brother, Louis Lapierre, Jean Lapierre's brother.

Laurel Mountain Aviation

The pilot stated that after landing, the nose landing gear collapsed. Examination of the airplane nose strut down-lock installation revealed that the strut on the right side of the nose landing gear trunnion was installed incorrectly; the strut installed on the right was a left-sided strut. Incorrect installation of the strut could result in the bearing pulling loose from the pin on the right side of the trunnion, which could allow the nose landing gear to collapse. A review of maintenance records revealed recent maintenance activity on the nose gear involving the strut. The design of the strut is common for the left and right. Both struts have the same base part number, and a distinguishing numerical suffix is added for left side and right side strut determination. If correctly installed, the numbers should be oriented facing outboard. The original MU-2 Maintenance Manual did not address the installation or correct orientation of the strut. The manufacturer issued MU-2 Service Bulletin (SB) No. 200B, dated June 24, 1994, to address the orientation and adjustment. Service Bulletin 200B states on page 8 of 10 that the “Part Number may be visible in this (the) area from the out board sides (Inked P/N may be faded out).”

Mitts Corporation

On his first Instrument Landing System (ILS) approach, the pilot initially flew through the localizer course. The pilot then reestablished the airplane on the final approach course, but the airplane’s altitude at the decision height was about 500 feet too high. He executed a missed approach and received radar vectors for another approach. The airplane was flying inbound on the second ILS approach when a witness reported that he saw the airplane about 150 feet above the ground in about a 60-degree nose-low attitude with about an 80-degree right bank angle. The initial ground impact point was about 2,150 feet west of the runway threshold and about 720 feet north (left) of the extended centerline. The cloud tops were about 3,000 feet with light rime or mixed icing. The flap jack screws and flap indicator were found in the 5-degree flap position. The inspection of the airplane revealed no preimpact anomalies to the airframe, engines, or propellers. A radar study performed on the flight indicated that the calibrated airspeed was about 130 knots on the final approach, but subsequently decreased to about 95–100 knots during the 20-second period prior to loss of radar contact. According to the airplane’s flight manual, the wings-level power-off stall speed at the accident aircraft’s weight is about 91 knots. The ILS approach flight profile indicates that 20 degrees of flaps should be used at the glide slope intercept while maintaining 120 knots minimum airspeed. At least 20 degrees of flaps should be maintained until touchdown. The “No Flap” or “5 Degrees Flap Landing” flight profile indicates that the NO FLAP Vref airspeed is 115 knots calibrated airspeed minimum.

Briggs Tobacco %26 Specialty Company

According to the pilot, after he took off for a nearby airport he raised the landing gear but did not raise the 20-degree flaps per the “after takeoff” checklist. Shortly thereafter, when the airplane was at an altitude of about 2,400 feet, and in "heavy rain," the pilot noticed that the right engine was losing power. He subsequently feathered the propeller as engine power reduced to 40 percent, but still did not raise the flaps. Weather, recorded shortly before the accident, included scattered clouds at 500 feet, and a broken cloud layer at 1,200 feet, and the pilot advised air traffic control (ATC) that he would fly an ILS (instrument landing system) approach if he could maintain altitude. After maneuvering, and advising ATC that he could not maintain altitude, the pilot descended the airplane to a right base leg where, about 1/4 nautical mile from the runway, it was approximately 300 feet above the terrain. The pilot completed the landing, with the airplane touching down about 6,200 feet down the 8,000-foot runway, heading about 20 degrees to the left. The airplane veered off the left side of the runway and subsequently went through an airport fence. The left engine was running at “high speed” when fire fighters responded to the scene. The right engine propeller was observed in the feathered position at the scene, and after subsequent examinations, the right engine was successfully run in a test cell with no noticeable loss of power. There was no determination as to why the right engine lost power in flight, although rain ingestion is a possibility. Airplane performance calculations indicated that with the landing gear up, a proper single-engine power setting and airspeed, and flaps raised, the airplane should have been able to climb about 650 feet per minute. Even with flaps at 20 degrees, it should have been able to climb at 350 feet per minute. In either case, unless the airplane was not properly configured, there was no reason why it should not have been able to maintain the altitudes needed to position it for a stabilized approach.

Intercontinental Jet

Prior to the accident flight, the pilot obtained a preflight weather briefing and filed an instrument flight rules flight plan. The briefer noted no adverse weather conditions along the route. The airplane departed the airport at 0853, and climbed to FL190. The first two hours of the flight was uneventful, and the aircraft was handed off to Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZJX ARTCC) at 1053. The pilot contacted ZJX Crestview sector at 1054:45 with the airplane level at FL190. At 1102, the Crestview controller broadcasted an alert for Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMET) 32E, which pertained to thunderstorms in portions of Florida southwest of the pilot's route. At 1103, the controller cleared to the airplane to descend to 11,000 feet and the pilot again acknowledged. At 1110:21, the pilot was instructed to contact Tyndall Approach. The pilot checked in with the Tyndall RAPCON North Approach controller at 1110:39. The pilot was told to expect a visual approach. Shortly thereafter, the pilot transmitted, "...we're at 11,000, like to get down lower so we can get underneath this stuff." The controller told the pilot to stand by and expect lower [altitude] in 3 miles. About 15 seconds later, the controller cleared to pilot to descend to 6,000 feet, and the pilot acknowledged. At 1112:27, the pilot was instructed to contact Tyndall Approach on another frequency. The airplane's position at that time was just northwest of REBBA intersection. The Panama sector controller cleared the pilot to descend to 3,000 feet at his discretion, and the pilot acknowledged. There was no further contact with the airplane. The controller attempted to advise the pilot that radar contact was lost, but repeated attempts to establish communications and locate the airplane were unsuccessful. A witness, located approximately 1 mile south of the accident site, reported he heard a "loud bang," looked up and observed the airplane in a nose down spiral. The witness reported there were parts separating from the airplane during the descent. The witness stated it was raining and there was lightning and thunder in the area. Local authorities reported that the weather "was raining real good with lightning and the thunderstorm materialized very quickly." The main wreckage came to rest near the edge of a swamp in tree covered and high grassy terrain. The left wing, left engine, and the left wing tip tank were located in a wooded area approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the main wreckage. The left wing separated from the airplane inboard of the left engine and nacelle. Examination of the fracture surfaces indicated that both the front and rear spars failed from "catastrophic static up-bending overstress..." The airplane flew through an intense to extreme weather radar echo containing a thunderstorm. Although the controllers denied that there was any weather displayed ahead of the airplane, recorded radar and display data indicated that moderate to extreme precipitation was depicted on and near the route of flight. During the flight, the pilot was given no real-time information on the weather ahead. The airplane was equipped with a weather radar system and the system provided continuous en route weather information relative to cloud formation, rainfall rate, thunderstorms, icing conditions, and storm detection up to a distance of 240 miles. No anomalies were noted with the airframe and engines.

Drug %26 Laboratory Disposal Inc.

The pilot had received an outlook briefing during the morning hours before the accident. The briefing included information regarding widely scattered thunderstorms and rain showers along portions of the pilot's planned route of flight. At the time of the accident, a convective weather significant to the safety of all aircraft (convective SIGMET) was in effect for the pilot's route of flight, and the information about the convective SIGMET was broadcast to the pilot by air traffic control (ATC). Several airplanes in the vicinity of the accident airplane were deviating around weather. Conversations between the accident pilot and the ATC controller were consistent with the accident airplane's weather radar functioning, and the possibility that the accident airplane's weather radar was providing more information than the ATC weather radar. Although the pilot initially declined a deviation query by ATC, he later accepted one. Shortly after, the pilot was unable to maintain his assigned altitude of 28,000 feet msl (FL 280), and the airplane impacted terrain consistent with a vertical descent. At the time of the accident, at FL 280, weak to moderate weather radar echoes existed. Very strong to intense weather radar echoes were seen about FL 200. The ATC facility was equipped with NEXRAD derived weather displays. The weather displays had four settings: below FL 240, between FL 240 and FL 330, above FL 330, and from sea level to FL 600. At the time of the accident, the ATC controller's weather display indicated weak to moderate echoes above FL240. Very strong to intense weather radar echoes existed about FL200; however, the ATC controller did not have his weather display set to that altitude as he was not controlling traffic at that altitude. The investigation could not determine if the pilot was aware of the stronger intensity echoes below his altitude, or if the airplane's weather radar was depicting the stronger echoes. Examination of the wreckage did not reveal any preimpact mechanical malfunctions.

Flying Cloud

Witnesses stated that they observed the twin-engine airplane roll into a steep right bank and enter a spin at a low altitude (less than 700 feet) during the initial climb. The airplane then descended and impacted terrain about 1.5 miles from the end of the departure runway. Some witnesses reported hearing an unusual engine noise just before the airplane began to roll and spin. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed. Examination of the right engine revealed that the ring gear support of the engine/propeller gearbox had fractured in flight due to high cycle fatigue originating from the corner radii of the high-speed pinion cutout. The reason for the fatigue could not be determined. The ring gear support disengaged from the ring gear due to this failure, resulting in a disconnection in power being transferred from the engine power section to the propeller. In addition to the ability for a pilot to manually feather the propellers, and an automatic feathering feature, the engine (Honeywell TPE-331) design also includes a “Negative Torque Sensing” (NTS) system that would automatically respond to a typical failed engine condition involving a propeller that is driving the coupled engine. Feathering the propeller reduces drag and asymmetric yawing due to the failed engine. All Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification evaluations for one-engine inoperative handling qualities for the airplane type were conducted with the NTS system operational. According to the airplane manufacturer, the NTS system was designed to automatically reduce the drag on the affected engine to provide a margin of safety until the pilot is able to shut down the engine with the condition lever. However, if a drive train disconnect occurs at the ring gear support, the NTS system is inoperable, and the propeller can come out of feather on its own, if the disconnect is followed by a pilot action to retard the power lever on the affected engine. In this scenario, once the fuel flow setting is reduced below the point required to run the power section at 100% (takeoff) rpm, the propeller governor would sense an “underspeed” condition and would attempt to increase engine rpm by unloading the propeller, subsequently driving the propeller out of feather toward the low pitch stop. This flat pitch condition would cause an increase in aerodynamic drag on one side of the airplane, and unanticipated airplane control difficulty could result due to the asymmetry.

Nav Air Charter

At 1834 Pacific standard time, the Nav Air Charter Inc. Mitsubishi MU-2B-36 aircraft (registration C-FTWO, serial number 672) took off from Runway 15 at the Terrace Airport for a courier flight to Vancouver, British Columbia. The left engine lost power shortly after take-off. The aircraft descended, with a slight left bank, into trees and crashed about 1600 feet east of the departure end of Runway 15 on a heading of 072° magnetic. The aircraft was destroyed by the impact and a post-crash fire, and the two pilots were fatally injured.

McNeely Charter Service

The twin-engine airplane was destroyed when it impacted an earthmoving scraper and terrain in a field about 2.5 miles north of the departure airport in night visual meteorological conditions. Witnesses reported that the pilot had aborted an earlier flight when he returned to the airport and told the mechanic that he had a right engine fire warning light. The discrepancy could not be duplicated during maintenance, and the airplane departed. About 23 minutes after departure, the pilot reported to air traffic control that he needed to return to the airport to have something checked out. The pilot did not report to anyone why he decided to return to the departure airport, and he flew over four airports when he returned to the departure airport. Radar track data indicated that the airplane flew over the departure end of runway 35 at an altitude of about 1,600 feet agl, and made a descending left turn. The airplane's altitude was about 800 feet agl when it crossed the final approach course for runway 35. The airplane continued the descending left turn, but instead of landing on runway 35, the airplane flew a course that paralleled the runway, about 0.8 nm to the right of runway 35. The airplane continued to fly a northerly heading and continued to descend. The radar track data indicated that the airplane's airspeed was decreasing from about 130 kts to about 110 kts during the last one minute and fifty seconds of flight. The last reinforced beacon return indicated that the airplane's altitude was about 200 feet agl, and the airspeed was about 107 kts. The airplane impacted terrain about 0.75 nm from the last radar contact on a 338-degree magnetic heading. A witness reported that the airplane was going slow and was "extremely low." He reported that the airplane disappeared, and then there was an explosion and a fireball that went up about 1,000 feet. Inspection of the airplane revealed that it impacted the earthmover in about a wings level attitude. The landing gear handle was found to be in the landing gear UP position. The inspection of the left engine and propeller revealed damage indicative of engine operation at the time of impact. Inspection of the right engine revealed damage indicative of the engine not operating at the time of impact, consistent with an engine shutdown and a feathered propeller. No pre-existing conditions were found in either engine that would have interfered with normal operation. The inspection of the right engine fire detection loop revealed that the connector had surface contamination. When tested, an intermittent signal was produced which could give a fire alarm indication to the pilot. After the surface contamination was removed, the fire warning detection loop operated normally.

Flight Line - USA

The commercial pilot was executing a precision instrument approach at night in instrument meteorological conditions when the airplane collided with terrain about four miles short of the runway. A review of air traffic control communications and radar data revealed the pilot was vectored onto the final approach course but never got established on the glide slope. Instead, he made a controlled descent below the glide slope as he proceeded toward the airport. When the airplane was five miles from the airport, a tower controller received an aural low altitude alert generated by the Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (MSAW) system. The tower controller immediately notified the pilot of his low altitude, but the airplane collided with terrain within seconds. Examination of the instrument approach system and onboard flight navigation equipment revealed no pre-mishap anomalies. A review of the MSAW adaptation parameters revealed that the tower controller would only have received an aural alarm for aircraft operating within 5 nm of the airport. However, the frequency change from the approach controller to the tower controller occurred when the airplane was about 10.7 miles from the airport, leaving a 5.7 mile segment where both controllers could receive visual alerts, but only the approach controller received an aural alarm. A tower controller does not utilize a radar display as a primary resource for managing air traffic. In 2004, the FAA changed a policy, which eliminated an approach controller's responsibility to inform a tower controller of a low altitude alert if the tower had MSAW capability. The approach controller thought the MSAW alarm parameter was set 10 miles from the airport, and not the 5 miles that existed at the time of the accident. Subsequent investigation revealed, that The FAA had improperly informed controllers to ensure they understood the alarm parameters for control towers in their area of responsibility. This led the approach controller to conclude that the airplane was no longer her responsibility once she handed it over to the tower controller. Plus, the tone of the approach controller's aural MSAW alarm was not sufficient in properly alerting her of the low altitude alert.

Max Aviation - USA

Witnesses observed the aircraft perform a rolling takeoff and it was airborne by the crossing runway (1,300 feet down the 6,600 foot runway). The aircraft entered an approximate 40 degree nose high climb rate to about 1,000 feet. The aircraft then entered a steep left hand banking turn. The nose dropped and the aircraft rotated up to about 4 times before colliding with the flat terrain adjacent to the departure end of the runway threshold. On site documentation of the airframe found no evidence of a flight control malfunction. An engine examination and teardown found that the gearbox section of the left engine experienced a high cycle fatigue failure of the high speed pinion journal bearing oil supply tube and subsequent degradation of the high speed pinion journal bearings. This failure resulted in a partial power loss to the left engine. The pilot had recently purchased this aircraft and he had accumulated approximately 11 hours since the purchase. The pilot had stated to personnel at the place where he purchased the aircraft that he had not received, nor did he need recurrent training in this aircraft as he had several thousand hours in the aircraft. Flight logs provided by the family indicated that the pilot had accumulated about 551 hours in a Mitsubishi, however, the last time that the pilot had flown this make and model was 14 years prior to the accident. Logbook entries indicated that only a few hours of flight time had been accumulated in all aircraft during the approximately 2 years prior to the accident. Personnel that flew with the pilot in the make and model aircraft involved in the accident described the pilot as "proficiency lacking." Normal takeoff calculations for the aircraft with the flaps configured to 5 degrees, indicated a ground run of 2,900 feet, with a rotation speed of 106 KCAS, and 125 KCAS for the climb out. A maximum pitch attitude of 13 degrees maximum is indicated. Performance calculations indicated that the aircraft was capable of lifting off where the witnesses observed and climbing to 1,000 feet agl by the end of the runway. To achieve this performance the aircraft would have rotated at approximately 84 KCAS and climbed at an airspeed below Vmc (100 KCAS) and close to power-off stall speed (86 KCAS) with 5 degrees of flaps. The airplane's flight manual indicated that if an engine failure occurs in the takeoff climb and the landing gear is fully retracted, the emergency procedures is to maintain 140 KCAS, flaps to 5 degrees, the failed engine condition lever to EMERGENCY STOP, and failed engine power lever to TAKEOFF. On site documentation found the left side condition lever in the takeoff/land position and the power lever was found half-way between takeoff and flight idle.

Japan Air Self-Defense Force - Koku Jieitai

Few minutes after takeoff from Niigata Airport, while flying in good weather conditions, the twin engine aircraft crashed on Mt Mikagura located about 55 km southeast of Niigata. All four crew members were killed. They were engaged in a local training mission.

Jaax Flying Service

The pilot failed to lower the landing gear prior to touching down on the runway. The pilot said that during the approach into the airport, the flaps would not lock into the 20-degree extended position. The pilot decided to execute a no-flap landing and referred to the emergency checklist. The checklist advised the pilot to extend the landing gear; however, the pilot skimmed over the information thinking that the gear was already down and locked, and focused on the stabilized approach into the airport. The airplane touched down with the gear in the retracted position. No mechanical malfunctions were noted with the landing gear system on the airplane and a ground test run of the flaps did not reproduce the failure encountered during flight.

Flight Line - USA

Shortly after takeoff, the pilot reported to air traffic control he needed to return to the airport to land. The controller asked the pilot if he required any assistance, and the pilot responded, "negative for right now uh just need to get in as soon as possible." The controller then asked the pilot what the problem was, in which the pilot responded, "stand by one minute." Approximately 30 seconds later and while the airplane was on a left downwind to runway 35R, the pilot stated he was declaring an emergency and "...we've got an air an engine ta shut down uh please roll the equipment." The controller and other witnesses observed the airplane on the base leg and then overshoot the final approach to runway 35R. After observing the airplane overshoot the final approach, the controller then cleared the pilot to the next runway, runway 28, and there was no response from the pilot. The controller observed the airplane's landing lights turn down toward the terrain, and "the MU2 was gone." A witness observed the airplane make an "immediate sharp bank to the left and descend to the ground. The impact appeared to be just less than a 45 degree angle, nose first." A performance study revealed that while the airplane was on downwind, the airplane started to bank to the left. The bank angle indicated a constant left bank angle of about 24 degrees as the airplane turned to base leg. Twenty-three seconds later, the bank angle began to increase further as the airplane turned to final approach, overshooting the runway, while the angle of attack reached stall angle of about 17 degrees. The flight path angle then showed a decrease by 22 to 25 degrees, the calibrated airspeed showed a decrease by 40 to 70 knots, and the vertical speed indicated a 3,000 feet per minute descent rate just before impact. Examination of the airframe revealed the flaps were in the 20 degree position, and the landing gear was retracted. According to the airplane flight manual, during the base leg, the flaps should remain in the 5 degree position and the landing gear extended; and when landing is assured, the flaps then extended to 20 degrees and maintain 125 knots calibrated airspeed (KCAS) during final and 110 KCAS when over the runway. Minimum controllable airspeed (Vmc) for the airplane is 99 KCAS. Examination of the propellers revealed that at the time of impact, the left propeller was in the feathered position and the right propeller was in the normal operating range. Examination of the left engine revealed static witness marks on several internal engine components, and no anomalies were noted that would have precluded normal operation. The reason for the precautionary shutdown of the left engine was not determined. Examination of the right engine revealed rotational scorring and metal spray deposits on several internal engine components. Four vanes of the oil pump transfer tube were separated and missing. The gearbox oil-scavenge pump was not free to rotate and was disassembled. Disassembly of the oil-scavenge pump revealed one separated oil pump transfer tube vane was located in the pump. Pitting and wear damage was noted on all of the roller bearing elements and the outer bearing race of the propeller shaft roller bearing. No additional anomalies were noted.

EPPS Air Service

The pilot was finishing his third round-trip, Part 135 cargo flight. The first round trip began the previous evening, about 2150, and the approach back to the origination airport resulted in a landing on runway 15R at 2305. The second approach back to the origination airport resulted in a landing on runway 28 at 0230. Prior to the third approach back to the airport, the pilot was cleared for, and acknowledged a visual approach to runway 33R twice, at 0720, and at 0721. However, instead of proceeding to the runway, the airplane flew north of it, on a westerly track consistent with a modified downwind to runway 15L. During the westerly track, the airplane descended to 700 feet. Just prior to an abeam position for runway 15L, the airplane made a "sharp" left turn back toward the southeast, and descended into the ground. Witnesses reported the airplane's movements as "swaying motions as if it were going to bank left, then right, and back left again," and "the nose...pointing up more than anything...but doing a corkscrew motion." Other witnesses reported the "wings straight up and down," and "wings vertical." Tower controllers also noted the airplane to be "low and tight," and "in an unusually nose high attitude close to the ground. It then "banked left and appeared to stall and then crashed." A post-flight examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunction. The pilot, who reported 6,800 hours of flight time, had also flown multiple round trips the previous two evenings. He had checked into a hotel at 0745, the morning prior to the accident flight, checked out at 1956, the same day, and reported for work about 1 hour before the first flight began.

Royal Air Freight - Royal Air Charter

Approximately 3 minutes prior to the accident, the airplane was flying in a northeast direction, at 17,100 feet, and was instructed by air traffic controllers to contact Boston Center. He acknowledged the instruction, and no further transmissions were received from the pilot. Radar data indicated the airplane continued level at 17,100 feet on a northeasterly heading, and maintained a groundspeed of 255 knots, for approximately 2 minutes after the last transmission. The airplane then climbed 300 feet, and descended abruptly, losing 10,700 feet during the next 46 seconds, while maintaining an approximate ground speed of 255 knots. The airplane then initiated a climb from 6,700 feet to 7,600 feet, maintained an altitude of 7,600 feet for 4 seconds, and then entered a continuous descent until the last radar contact 17 seconds later, at an altitude of 2,400 feet. Several witnesses observed the airplane prior to it impacting the ground. All of the witness described the airplane in a "flat spin" with the engines running prior to impact. Examination of recorded weather data revealed several areas of light-to-moderate precipitation echoes in the vicinity of the accident site. The maximum echo tops were depicted ranging from 14,000 to 25,000 feet, with tops near 17,000 feet in the immediate vicinity of the accident site. Recorded radar images depicted the airplane traveling through an area of lower echoes for approximately 5-minutes immediately prior to the accident. AIRMET Zulu was current for icing conditions from the freezing level to 22,000 feet over the route of flight and the accident site. Four PIREPs were also issued indicating light-to-moderate rime to mixed icing in the clouds from the freezing level to 16,000 feet. Cloud tops were reported from 16,000 to 17,000 feet by two aircraft. Examination of the airplane and engines revealed no pre-impact mechanical anomalies. Additionally, examination of the cockpit overhead switch panel indicated propeller de-ice, engine intake heat, windshield anti-ice, and wing de-ice were all in the 'off' position. According to the pilot's toxicology test results, pseudoephedrine and diphenhydramine was detected in the pilot's urine. Diphenhydramine was not detected in the blood.

Ronald S. Scott

The airplane entered a descending turn while on a night visual approach and impacted a river. At 2030, the pilot reported leaving 6,000 feet, and stated that he had the airport in sight. The controller cleared him for the approach. He advised the controller that he would like to cancel his IFR clearance, and switch to the traffic advisory frequency. The controller cleared him to switch to advisory frequency. No further transmissions were recorded from the flight. According to radar data, the airplane was southeast of the airport, and maintaining a westerly heading south of the airport. At 2035, it crossed a river, and began a sharp left turn away from the airport. It completed about 90 degrees of turn before abruptly disappearing from radar contact, with the last radar target on the west side of the river near the impact location. The highly fragmented wreckage was recovered from the river after several weeks underwater. The teardown and examination of the engines disclosed that the left engine was not rotating or operating at the time of impact, and the left propeller was in feather. The type and degree of damage to the right engine was indicative of engine rotation and operation at the time of impact. Investigators found no pre-existing condition on either engine, or with the airframe systems, that would have interfered with normal operation, or explained the apparent shutdown of the left engine.

Hezemans Air

On November 2, 2003, about 2331 Atlantic standard time, a Mitsubishi MU-2B-35, N630HA, registered to Hezemans Air, Inc., collided with terrain short of the runway at Flamingo Airport, Bonaire, Netherlands Antilles, while on a CFR Part 91 positioning flight from Aruba to Bonaire. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed. The airplane received substantial damage and the airline transport-rated pilot received serious injuries. The flight originated from Aruba, the same day about 2250. The pilot stated that when on a 1- mile final approach for landing both engines lost power. The airplane descended and collided with terrain about 300 meters from the runway. Postaccident examination of the airplane by Civil Aviation Authorities showed the airplane did not contain any usable fuel and there was no evidence of fuel leakage from the airplane prior to the accident or after the accident.

Heringer Taxi Aéreo

The twin engine aircraft was completing a taxi flight from São Luis to Belém, carrying two passengers, two pilots and a load of briefcases with bank documents. On approach to Belém-Val de Cans Airport by night, the crew encountered poor weather conditions with limited visibility, CB's, rain falls and severe turbulences. On final approach, the aircraft went out of control and crashed on the Ilha das Onças Island, about 5,5 km west of runway 06 threshold. The aircraft was destroyed and all four occupants were killed.

Maxfly Aviation

The flight departed VFR, and when near the destination airport, was advised by air traffic control to hold VFR over the "plaza" and to make left 360 degree orbits. Several witnesses reported light rain was occurring at the time of the accident; there was no lightning or thunder. One witness located where the airplane came to rest reported observing the airplane emerge from the base of the clouds in a 45-degree left wing low and 20 degrees nose low attitude. He momentarily lost sight of the airplane but then noted it rolled to a wings level attitude. He also reported hearing the engine(s) "cutting in an out." Another witness located approximately 1/4 mile north of the accident site observed the airplane flying eastbound beneath the clouds in a right wing and nose low attitude, he also reported hearing the engine(s) sounding like they were "cutting in and out." A pilot-rated witness located an estimated 1,000 feet from where the airplane came to rest estimated that the ceiling was at 300 feet and there was light drizzle. He observed the airplane in a 45-degree angle of bank to the right and in a slight nose low attitude. He stated that the airplane continued in that attitude before he lost sight of the airplane at 250 feet. The airplane impacted trees then a concrete wall while in a nose and right wing low attitude. The airplane then traveled through automobile hoists/lifts which were covered by corrugated metal, and came to rest adjacent to a building of an automobile facility. Impact and a post crash fire destroyed the airplane, along with a building and several vehicles parked at the facility. Examination of the airplane revealed the flaps were symmetrically retracted and landing gears were retracted. No evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction was noted to the flight controls. Examination of the engines revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction; impact and fire damage precluded testing of several engine accessories from both engines. Examination of the propellers revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. Parallel slash marks were noted in several of the corrugated metal panels that covered the hoists/lifts, the slashes were noted 25 and 21 inches between them. According to the airplane manufacturer, the 25 inch distance between the propeller slashes corresponds to an airspeed of 123 knots. Additionally, the power-off stall speed at the airplanes calculated weight with the flaps retracted and 48 degree angle of bank was calculated to be 122 knots. Review of NTSB plotted radar data revealed that the pilot performed one 360-degree orbit to the left with varying angles of left bank and while flying initially at 1,300 feet, climbing to near 1,500 feet, then descending to approximately 800 feet. The airplane continued in the left turn and between 1502:10 and 1502:27, the calibrated airspeed decreased from 160 to 100 knots. At 1502:27, the bank angle was 48 degrees, and the angle of attack was 26 degrees. Between 1502:30 and 1502:35, the true heading changed indicating a bank to the right. The last plotted altitude was 200 feet, which occurred at 1502:35. A NTSB weather study indicated that at the area and altitude the airplane was operating, NWS VIP level 1 to 2 echoes (light to moderate intensity) were noted. Additionally, the terminal aerodrome forecast (TAF) for the destination airport indicated that temporarily between 1400 and 1800 (the flight departed at approximately 1436 and the accident occurred at approximately 1503), visibility 5 miles with moderate rain showers, scattered clouds at 1,500 feet, and a broken ceiling at 3,000 feet.

Bankair

The airplane was on final approach to land at Hilton Head Airport, when according to witnesses, it suddenly rolled to the right, and descended, initially impacting trees at about the 70-foot level, and then impacting the ground. A fire then ensued upon ground impact, and the debris field spanned about 370 feet along an azimuth of about 082 degrees. Examination of the airplane wreckage revealed that left wing flap actuator and jack nut measurements were consistent with the wing flaps being extended to 40 degrees, and on the right wing the flap jack nut and actuator measurements were consistent with the right flap being extended to about a 20-degrees. In addition, the right flap torque tube assembly between the flap motor and the flap stop assembly had disconnected, and the flap torque tube assembly's female coupler which attaches to the male spline end of the flap motor and flap stop assembly was found with a cotter pin installed through the female coupler of the flap stop assembly. The cotter pin, had not been placed through the spline and the coupler consistent with normal installation as per Mitsubishi's maintenance manual, or as specified in Airworthiness Directive 88-23-01. Instead, the cotter pin had missed the male spline on the flap motor. In addition, the flap coupler on the opposite side of the flap motor was found to also found to not have a cotter pin installed. Company maintenance records showed that on April 3, 2001, about 87 flight hours before the accident, the airplane was inspected per Airworthiness Directive (AD) 88-23-01, which required the disassembly, inspection, and reassembly of the flap torque tube joints. In addition, on July 9, 2001, the airplane was given a phase 1 inspection, and Bankair records showed that a company authorized maintenance person performed the applicable maintenance items, and certified the airplane for return to service.

John M. White

The pilot was maneuvering the airplane south of the airport preparing to make a VFR approach. Witnesses observed the airplane in a right spin. NTAP data showed the airplane to be well above stall speed before disappearing from radar. Examination of the radar data revealed that in 6 seconds, ground speed dropped 31 knots, from 200 knots to 169 knots, and altitude dropped 440 feet, from 11,760 feet to 11,320 feet (4,400 feet per minute). In the next 6 seconds, ground speed dropped another 31 knots, from 169 knots to 138 knots, and altitude dropped 1,020 feet, from 11,320 feet to 10,300 feet (10,200 feet per minute). According to the manufacturer, if the throttles were to be brought back into Beta (flat pitch) range, it is possible that one propeller could go into Beta an instant before the other propeller. If this were to happen, the airplane would instantly snap roll and enter a spiral. The pilot had received an estimated 4 hours of dual instruction in the airplane.

Jerry L. Fambrough

Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the planned cross-country flight for which the pilot obtained a weather briefing, filed an IFR flight plan, and received an ATC clearance. Approximately 8 minutes after takeoff, radar indicated the airplane was at 11,200 feet msl, heading 241 degrees, with a ground speed of 180 knots. No distress calls or additional communications with the pilot were recorded, and radar contact was lost. The airplane impacted the ground in an uncontrolled descent. The right wing tip tank separated from the airplane and was found 0.18 nautical miles from the main wreckage. The teardown and examination of both engines disclosed that the type and degree of damage was indicative of engine power section rotation and operation at the time of impact. There were no complete systems intact at the accident site due to the impact sequence and post-impact fire which consumed the aircraft. The landing gear and flaps were found in the retracted position. The portion of the right propeller shaft coupling found at the site was fractured through 360 degrees. Metallurgical examination revealed that the propeller shaft coupling failed in fatigue. The presence of the fatigue cracks indicated the coupler fractured in fatigue in service, and the fatigue cracks were not the result of ground impact. The circumferential fracture intersected the ends of several internal spline teeth. The origin of the fatigue crack could not be determined because of severe corrosion damage on the fracture surface. Fatigue propagation was in the aft direction and from the inside to the outside of the coupling. The engine core rotating components would have bee free to rotate when uncoupled from the propeller shaft. The maintenance records indicated that the failed coupling had accumulated approximately 4,000 hours since new, and 1,250 hours since engine overhaul in 1989. Since 1990, as a result of fatigue fractures, the manufacturer introduced several design changes for the propeller shaft coupling via optional Service Bulletins to be accomplished at the next access or hot section inspection (HSI). Impact and thermal damage of the right propeller precluded a determination of the in-flight blade angles. The calculations by the airplane manufacturer indicated that "the [intact] airplane was capable of continued flight" with the right propeller feathered, and that the "airplane can keep attitude, but cannot climb and cannot maintain altitude" with the right propeller in the flat pitch or wind milling positions, respectively. Metallurgical examination of the component brackets and associated bolts from the right tip tank revealed the separation of the tip tank resulted from a single-event overstress fracture of both the forward and aft tank attachment fittings. Calculations showed that a 3.763 radians per second (35.9 RPM) spin rate would cause the failure of the forward wing fuel tank attachment fitting. There had not been a previous in-flight separation of a wing tip fuel tank on this model airplane.

Private Colombian

While on final approach to Caucasia Airport, the twin engine aircraft crashed in unknown circumstances 3 km short of runway. The aircraft was destroyed and the pilot, sole on board, was killed.

Heringer Taxi Aéreo

On final approach to Macapá Airport, the left engine exploded and caught fire. The aircraft lost height, descended below the glide and eventually crash landed in a grassy area to the right of the runway and came to rest, bursting into flames. All five occupants escaped uninjured while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

Keith Corporation

The pilot departed on a night cross-country flight without obtaining a weather briefing or flight plan. Arriving in the area of the destination airport, the weather was reported as, 2 statute miles of visibility and mist; overcast cloud layer at 100 feet. The pilot requested an instrument flight rules clearance from the approach controller, and was vectored and cleared for the ILS 24 approach. The clearance included an altitude restriction of 1,500 feet msl, until the airplane was established on the localizer. As the pilot contacted the control tower, the tower controller issued a low altitude alert to the pilot. The pilot replied that he was climbing and the tower controller cleared the pilot to land, which the pilot acknowledged. No further pertinent radio transmissions were received from the airplane. The airplane came to rest in a wooded area about 3/4-mile from the runway threshold, and about 50 feet right of the extended centerline. Review of the approach plate for the ILS 24 approach revealed that the minimum glide slope intercept altitude at the beginning of the final approach segment on the precision approach was 1,500 feet. The glide slope altitude at the final approach fix for the non-precision approach, which was located about 4 miles from the approach end of the runway, was 1,407 feet. The glide slope altitude at the middle marker, which was located about 0.6 miles from the approach end of the runway, was 299 feet. Review of radar data revealed that the airplane was observed at 700 feet, about 4 miles from the airport, and at 300 feet, about 1.5 miles from the airport. The pilot had accumulated about 1,946 hours of total flight experience, with about 252 hours in make and model. The pilot had attended initial and recurrent training for the make and model airplane; however, did not complete the training. The pilot, aged 61, was Charles B. Yates, member of the New Jersey Senate, who was flying to Martha's Vineyard with his wife and two of his three children.

Skyline Aviation

The aircraft departed Den Helder-De Kooy Airport on a radar tracking flight over the North Sea. Following an uneventful mission, the crew was returning to De Kooy Airport. After touchdown on runway 03, the crew activated the thrust reverser systems when the aircraft lost controllability. The pilot attempted to maintain control and selected the left throttle from 'reverse' again to turn to the right. Eventually, he feathered the right propeller and cut off the fuel supply, causing the right engine to stop. The aircraft veered off runway to the left and came to rest in a ditch. Both pilots escaped uninjured and the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

American Check Transport

The airplane impacted a ridgeline about 1.5 miles from the runway and approximately 7 to 14 seconds after the pilot reported a dual engine flameout. The airplane's altitude was about 400 feet agl when the pilot reported the flameout. The inspection of the airplane revealed no preexisting anomalies. Icing conditions were forecast and PIREPS indicated that light to moderate rime/mixed icing conditions existed along the route of flight. The Continuous Ignition switches were found in the OFF position. The Approach procedures listed in the Airplane's Flight Manual stated, 'CONTINUOUS IGNITION SHALL BE SELECTED TO ON DURING APPROACH AND LANDING WHILE IN OR SHORTLY FOLLOWING FLIGHT IN ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL ICING CONDITIONS.' The aircraft manufacturer had issued a Service Bulletin in 1995 for the installation of an auto-ignition system to '... reduce the possibility of engine flame-out when icing conditions are encountered and the continuous ignition is not selected.' The operator had not installed the non-mandatory service bulletin. On May 5, 2000, the FAA issued an Airworthiness Directive that required the installation of an auto-ignition system. The toxicology test detected extremely high levels of dihydrocodeine in the pilot's blood. The pilot received a special issuance second-class medical certificate on August 22, 1995, after receiving treatment for a self disclosed history of drug abuse. The drug testing that this pilot underwent as a consequence of his previous self disclosed history of drug abuse would not have detected these substances.

BTC Saratoga

Witnesses reported that during the airplane's takeoff roll they heard a heard a series of repeated sounds, which they described as similar to a "backfire" or "compressor stall." Several witnesses reported seeing the airplane's right propeller "stopped." One witness reported that as the airplane lifted off the ground, he heard "a loud cracking sound followed by an immediate prop wind down into feather." He continued to watch the airplane, as the gear was retracted and the airplane entered a climb and right turn. Subsequently, the airplane pitched up, entered a "Vmc roll-over," followed by a 360-degree turn, and then impacted the ground. Radar data indicated the airplane took off and climbed on runway heading to a maximum altitude of about 200 feet agl. The airplane than entered a right turn and began to lose altitude. A radar study revealed that the airplane's calibrated airspeed was 97 knots when the last radar return was recorded. According to the flight manual, minimum controllable airspeed (Vmc) was 93 knots. Examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane impacted the ground in a near vertical attitude. A post-crash fire erupted, which destroyed all cockpit instruments and switches. Examination of the propellers revealed that neither of the propellers were in the feathered position at the time of impact. Examination of the left engine revealed signatures consistent with operation at the time of impact. Examination of the right engine revealed that the second stage impeller shroud exhibited static witness marks indicating that the engine was not operating at the time of impact. However, rotational scoring was also observed through the entire circumference of the impeller shroud. The static witness marks were on top of the rotational marks. Examination of the right engine revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. The left seat pilot had accumulated a total flight time of about 950 hours of which 16.9 hours were in an MU-2 flight simulator and 4.5 hours were in the accident airplane. Although he had started an MU-2 Pilot-Initial training course, he did not complete the course. The right seat pilot had accumulated a total flight time of about 2,000 hours of which 20.0 hours were in an MU-2 flight simulator and 20.6 hours were in the accident airplane. He had successfully completed an MU-2 Pilot-Initial training course one month prior to the accident.

Lucky Landings Charter

With one pilot and one passenger, the Mitsubishi MU-2B-40 Solitaire aircraft, serial number 410 S.A., departed on a night instrument flight rules flight from Parry Sound / Georgian Bay Airport, Ontario, destined for Toronto / Lester B. Pearson International Airport. Prior to departure, the pilot received his instrument flight rules clearance via telephone from the Sault Ste. Marie flight service station with a clearance valid time of 2118 eastern daylight time from Toronto Area Control Centre and a clearance cancel time of 2135. When the pilot did not establish communications with Toronto Area Control Centre within the clearance valid time, the Area Control Centre supervisor commenced a communication search. At 2151, he confirmed with Parry Sound / Georgian Bay Airport personnel that the aircraft had departed 10 to 15 minutes earlier. The aircraft was assumed missing and the Rescue Coordination Centre in Trenton, Ontario, was notified. Search and rescue was dispatched and three days later the aircraft wreckage was located one nautical mile west of the airport. Both of the aircraft occupants were fatally injured. The aircraft disintegrated as it cut a 306-foot swath through the poplar forest. The accident occurred at night in instrument meteorological conditions.

Mag Marketing

On January 11 1999, during a local check flight for the new owner-pilot, as the aircraft was descending through about 150 feet during the final stage of a visual approach to Runway 27 at Frankfurt Egelsbach Airport, Egelsbach, the pilot 'pulled the throttles back to ground idle.' The check pilot immediately moved the throttles forward again but meanwhile the aircraft had developed a high rate of descent and it touched down very hard on the threshold of Runway 27 wherein the nose gear and left main landing gear broke off.

LW Aviation

The airplane's left engine had been overhauled and required an in-flight Negative Torque Sensing (NTS) check. The procedures required that the left engine be shut down during the test flight. The test flight was conducted at night. The pilots were briefed that there was icing and moderate rime icing mixed below 15,000 feet in clouds and precipitation. The cloud bases were between 2,500 to 2,900 feet agl. After departure, the pilot reported to ATC that they were clear and on top of the clouds at about 6,500 feet msl. N5LN was assigned a 180 degree heading at an assigned altitude of 8,000 feet. Without notification to ATC, N5LN turned to a southeast heading, descended from 7,700 feet to about 5,500 feet, and decelerated from about 182 kts to about 138 kts. ATC assigned N5LN a block altitude of 6,000 to 8,000 feet and a VFR-On-Top clearance. ATC instructed N5LN to turn right to stay in the assigned airspace. N5LN turned right but continued to descend from about 5,500 feet to the last radar indication of 4,500 feet. The airplane impacted the ground in a steep attitude. The inspection of the wreckage indicated the landing gear was down, and with full right rudder trim and about six degrees nose up trim. The examination of the engines indicated both engines were rotating and operating at the time of impact. The examination of the airframe and propellers found no pre-existing anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.

Sete Taxi Aéreo

During the takeoff roll at São Paulo-Congonhas Airport, the crew encountered an engine failure and decided to abort. The airplane was stopped on the main runway and all five occupants escaped uninjured. However, debris punctured a fuel tank and the aircraft caught fire and was severely damaged by fire and later written off.

PVS International

The airplane departed runway 1L and radar data indicated the airplane maintained about a 110 knot ground speed for 37 seconds as it climbed to 1,400 feet msl (642 feet agl) with a 008 degree heading. The last radar 14 seconds later indicated the airplane's heading was 342 degrees and had a 130 knot ground speed. The winds were 290/11. Witnesses reported seeing the airplane flying low and slow, and then it made a turn like a "barrel roll" to the left before impacting the ground. Examination of the engines and airframe revealed no pre-existent anomalies. The left and right propellers exhibited leading edge damage and chordwise abrasions. The pilot had a total of about 1,175 flight hours with about 250 hours in the type and model aircraft. The copilot had 4,094 total hours, but had 10 hours of turbine time and no flight time in the type and model of aircraft. The pilot had indicated he was practicing simulated single engine failures. The gear was fully retracted. The trim settings were set for a right engine out situation. The flap selector was set to "UP" flaps, but the flaps were found in transit at approximately 2 degrees of flaps. The Airplane Flight Manual indicated that during "Engine Failure in Takeoff-Gear Fully Retracted" stated that the required airspeed before selecting flaps to 5 degrees was 140 KCAS. The Pilot's Operating Handbook stated the flaps take approximately 31 seconds to retract from 20 to 0 flaps, or 21 seconds to retract from 5 to 0 flaps.

Air Hi Ho

The pilot said that after climbing about 500 feet after takeoff, at 120 knots with the gear retracted, the left engine lost power. He feathered the propeller, lowered the nose to the horizon, and began a shallow left turn back to the airport. He left the flaps at 20° and noted a descent of 200 feet to 300 feet per minute in the turn. After clearing trees, the pilot extended the landing gear, banked the aircraft to the right to align it with the runway and lowered flaps to 40°. After touchdown, he applied single engine reversing. The aircraft went off right side of runway and into a ditch, collapsing the right main and nose gear. Examination of the engine revealed the torque sensor housing had failed, resulting in loss of drive to the fuel pump. Metallurgical exam of the housing arm of the torque sensor revealed it had failed from fatigue. On 9/14/79, a service bulletin (SB) was issued for replacement of the torque sensor housing with an improved housing. The manufacturer overhauled the engine on 12/1979, but SB was not complied with. SB indicated a history of resonant vibration causing cracks in the housing arm of original torque sensor and gear assemblies, and that the housing should be replaced, no later than during next part exposure. Investigation revealed pilot did not comply with engine failure procedures and airspeeds. Flight manual cautioned not to use 40° of flaps during single engine landings.

Med Arizona

The right engine lost power after an uncontained engine failure during the initial takeoff climb. The airplane would not climb and the pilot was forced to land. The pilot selected a street for a forced landing area. The pilot landed gear up while maneuvering to avoid hitting street light poles and automobiles. After touchdown, the airplane slid into a block wall. A fire erupted as a result of a post impact fuel leak in the left wing. The airplane's engines were examined at the manufacturer's facilities. The right engine exhibited evidence of an uncontained separation of the second stage turbine rotor disk. Examination of the disk fragments revealed a low cycle fatigue fracture mode. The fatigue initiated from multiple areas at and adjacent to the inside diameter bore surface near the aft side of the disk. According to the engine manufacturer, the multiple indication areas were associated with uninspectable size porosity and the primary carbides in the cast material. There were no material or casting defects detected on any of the fractures through the wheel.

Bush Field Aircraft Company

The pilot was engaged in a local military mission at Tyndall AFB. On approach to runway 13L, conflicting traffic forced the pilot to initiate a go-around procedure. During the second approach, the pilot failed to follow the approach checklist and failed to lower the undercarriage. The aircraft landed on its belly and came to rest on the runway. The pilot escaped uninjured.

Ronald C. Bingham

The pilot reported that loss of power occurred in both engines after he entered the traffic pattern for a full stop landing. The airplane collided with trees during an emergency landing in a cotton field near the airport. Subsequent review of the aircraft maintenance logs disclosed that Mitsubishi MU-2 Service Bulletin (SB) 130A had not been accomplished on this airplane. According to the manufacturer, an inadvertent failure or the improper installation of a filler cap after refueling may cause an air pressure differential between the center and outboard portions of the main integral fuel tank. Air leakage from the filler cap may result in failure of the fuel transfer system to move fuel from the outboard tank section to the center tank section. To eliminate this possible malfunction, the operator was to remove vent check valves from the bulkhead between the tanks in accordance with SB 130A. The operator's maintenance policies required that, company jet and turbo propeller aircraft be maintained under a maintenance program in accordance with FAR Parts 135.415, 135.417, 135.423, 135.443, and a corporate flight management approved aircraft inspection program (AAIP). The maintenance inspection program also included compliance with manufacturers' service bulletins and service letters.

Benskin Brothers

The flight was on the ILS approach to runway 6, broke out of the clouds at 500 feet, and then re-entered the clouds. The airplane had not yet touched down when it drifted to right of the runway centerline and struck a snow bank located in the grass to the right of the runway, between the runway and the taxiway. The pilot stated he was just starting the missed approach when the accident occurred, and '...that there was no indication of a malfunction of the aircraft.' The reported ceiling was, 100 sky obscured, and the visibility was 1/4 mile, wind 040 degrees, 6 knots.

Bankair

The flight departed on a maintenance test flight with known wind gusts to 27 knots. Before takeoff the pilot performed an NTS check to each engine with no discrepancies noted. During flight the pilot performed an NTS check to the left engine. Two attempts to restart the left engine were unsuccessful. Each time the propeller came out of the feathered position and started to rotate but there was no fuel flow or ignition. The flight returned to land and while on short final to runway 29 with the wind from 250 degrees at 20 knots, a witness observed the airplane pitch nose up then down then heard the sound of power applied to the right engine. The airplane than rolled to the left, pitched nose down, impacted the ground coming to rest nearly inverted with the wing section separated. Postaccident examination of the left engine and accessories revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. The left engine fuel shutoff valve was found in the 'closed' position and no fuel was found aft of the fuel shutoff valve. The pilot stated that he has no recollection of the accident. The left and right engines had just been installed following 'hot section' work to both, and both were then started the day after installation with no discrepancies noted by company maintenance personnel.

Pro Air Services

A Mitsubishi MU-2 departed Salt Lake City, Utah, and climbed to 16,000 feet MS on an IFR flight to Pocatello, Idaho. While in cruise flight, the MU-2 encountered structural icing conditions. According to radar data, the MU-2 began slowing from a cruise speed of about 190 knots with slight deviations from heading and altitude. The airspeed decreased to about 100 knots, and the flight crew declared an unspecified emergency, then radio contact was lost. The MU-2 began a right turn, then it entered a steep descent and crashed. The pilot of a Beech 1900 (about 12 minutes in trail of the MU-2), stated that he encountered moderate rime icing at 16,000 feet. The Beech pilot activated his deice boots (3 times) and descended to 12,000 feet to exit the icing conditions. The MU-2 flight manual warned that during flight in icing conditions, stall warning devices may not be accurate and should not be relied upon; and to minimize ice accumulation, maintain a minimum cruise speed of 180 knots or exit the icing conditions. An investigation determined that the captain of the MU-2 was aware of deficiencies in the timer for the deice boots, as well as other maintenance deficiencies. The captain's medical certificate was dated 11/17/94; he was providing executive transportation for compensation under an agreement for "contractual flights," under 14 CFR 91. Although icing conditions were forecast in the destination area, no icing was forecast for the en route portion of the flight.

Corporate Flight Management

A witness stated he observed the airplane on climbout from runway 32. The airplane started a right turn estimated at about 30 to 45° angle of bank. The airplane stopped climbing and began descending. Subsequently, it collided with a tree line, while in a right bank, and then it impacted the ground. Weather conditions at the time of accident were described by the witness as very dark, with no ambient light or visible horizon. Examination of the airframe, flight control system, engine assembly, and propeller assembly revealed no evidence of a precrash failure or malfunction. The autopilot was found in the off position, and the autopilot circuit breakers were not tripped. The pilot and passenger were seriously injured and had no memory of the flight. A radio transcript revealed that after taking off, the flight had made one radio transmission to request an ifr clearance.

Transportes Aéreos Petroleros - TAPSA

The twin engine aircraft was completing a cargo flight from Neuquén to Buenos Aires-Ezeiza Airport with an intermediate stop in Bahía Blanca, carrying two pilots on behalf of Encotesa. Shortly after departure from Neuquén-Juan Domingo Perón Airport, while climbing by night, the crew informed ATC about his ETA in Bahía Blanca when control was lost. The aircraft crashed in Chimpay, in the suburb of Neuquén, about 4 km northeast of the airport, bursting into flames. Both pilots were killed. Crew: Horacio Ovidio Filippini, pilot, Valerio Augusto Diehl, pilot.