On the evening of 31 May 2000, Piper Chieftain, VH-MZK, was
being operated by Whyalla Airlines as Flight WW904 on a regular
public transport service from Adelaide to Whyalla, South Australia.
One pilot and seven passengers were on board. The aircraft departed
at 1823 central Standard Time (CST) and, after being radar vectored
a short distance to the west of Adelaide for traffic separation
purposes, the pilot was cleared to track direct to Whyalla at 6,000
ft. A significant proportion of the track from Adelaide to Whyalla
passed over the waters of Gulf St Vincent and Spencer Gulf. The
entire flight was conducted in darkness.
The aircraft reached 6,000 ft and proceeded apparently normally
at that altitude on the direct track to Whyalla. At 1856 CST, the
pilot reported to Adelaide Flight Information Service (FIS) that
the aircraft was 35 NM south-south-east of Whyalla, commencing
descent from 6,000 ft. Five minutes later the pilot transmitted a
MAYDAY report to FIS. He indicated that both engines of the
aircraft had failed, that there were eight persons on board and
that he was going to have to ditch the aircraft, but was trying to
reach Whyalla. He requested that assistance be arranged and that
his company be advised of the situation. About three minutes later,
the pilot reported his position as about 15 NM off the coast from
Whyalla. FIS advised the pilot to communicate through another
aircraft that was in the area if he lost contact with FIS. The
pilot's acknowledgment was the last transmission heard from the
aircraft. A few minutes later, the crew of another aircraft heard
an emergency locater transmitter (ELT) signal for 10-20
seconds.
Early the following morning, a search and rescue operation
located two deceased persons and a small amount of wreckage in
Spencer Gulf, near the last reported position of the aircraft. The
aircraft, together with five deceased occupants, was located
several days later on the sea-bed. One passenger remained
missing.
On 9 June 2000, the wreckage of the aircraft was recovered for
examination. Aside from the engines, no fault was found in the
aircraft that might have contributed to the accident. Both engines
had malfunctioned due to the failure of components of the
engines.
The crankshaft of the left engine fractured at the Number 6
connecting rod journal. Fatigue cracking was initiated by the
presence of a planar discontinuity in the journal surface. It was
evident that the discontinuity had been caused by localised thermal
expansion of the nitrided journal surface following contact with
the edge of the Number 6 connecting rod big end bearing insert. The
crankshaft failed approximately 50 flights after fatigue crack
initiation.
The Number 6 bearing insert was damaged during engine operation
through the combined effect of:
- high bearing loads created by lead oxybromide deposit induced
preignition, and
- lowered bearing insert retention forces associated with the
inclusion of an anti-galling compound between the bearing inserts
and the housings.
Fatigue cracking in the Number 6 connecting rod big end housing
had developed following the gradual destruction of the bearing
insert. The left engine probably continued to operate for 8-10
minutes after the final fracture of the Number 6 connecting rod
housing before the final disconnection of the Number 6 journal of
the crankshaft. It is likely that the engine would have displayed
signs of rough running and some power loss during this time. The
final disconnection of the crankshaft resulted in a loss of drive
to the magnetos, fuel pump, camshaft and, consequently, the sudden
stoppage of the engine. The left propeller was in the feathered
position when the aircraft struck the water, confirming that the
engine was not operating at that time.
The physical damage sustained by the right engine was restricted
to the localised melting of the Number 6 cylinder head and piston.
The piston damage had allowed combustion gases to bypass the piston
rings. The overheating of the right engine combustion chamber
components was a result of changes in heat transfer to cylinder
head and piston surfaces created by combustion end-gas detonation.
The carbonaceous nature of the residual deposits on the piston
crowns indicated that detonation had occurred under a rich fuel-air
mixture setting. Rich mixture settings are used with high engine
power settings.
The damaged piston would have caused a loss of engine oil and
erratic engine operation, particularly at higher power settings.
Engine lubrication was still effective at impact, indicating that
oil loss was incomplete and that the piston holing occurred at a
late stage of the flight.
Examination of the right propeller indicated that the blades
were in a normal operating pitch range (i.e. not feathered) when
the aircraft struck the water. It could not be confirmed that the
right engine was operating when the aircraft struck the water,
although it most probably was operating when radar contact was lost
as the aircraft descended through 4,260 ft when 25.8 NM from
Whyalla.
The aircraft was not fitted with a Flight Data Recorder (FDR) or
a Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), nor was it required to be. Analysis
of recorded radar data confirmed that the aircraft performed
normally during the flight until the latter stages of the cruise
segment when the speed gradually decreased. Speed variations,
accompanied by track irregularities, then became more pronounced.
Analysis of recorded voice transmissions revealed that propeller
(and engine) RPM during the climb from Adelaide was 2,400. The RPM
was 2,200 after the aircraft levelled at 6,000 ft. These were
normal climb and cruise engine settings used by the company and the
performance achieved by the aircraft during these segments was
consistent with normal engine performance. Just prior to the
commencement of descent, an RPM of 2,400 was identified. That was
not a normal engine power setting for that stage of the flight.
The aircraft speed and propeller RPM information, coupled with
the engine failure analysis, was consistent with the following
likely sequence of events:
- The power output from the left engine deteriorated during the
first third of the cruise segment of the flight after the Number 6
connecting rod big end housing had fractured. The engine ceased
operating completely 8-10 minutes later.
- In response to the failure of the left engine, the pilot
increased the power setting of the right engine.
- Increased combustion chamber component temperatures via
detonation within the right engine led to the Number 6 piston being
holed. That resulted in the erratic operation of the right engine
with reduced power and controllability and left the pilot with
little alternative but to ditch the aircraft.
- The double engine failure was a dependent failure.
Examination of eight failures of Textron Lycoming engines from a
number of operators that had occurred over the period January 2000
to November 2001 revealed that deposits of lead oxybromide on
combustion chamber surfaces were not restricted to the engines from
MZK; seven other engines had such deposits. The inclusion of a
copper-based anti-galling compound between the bearing insert and
big end housing was noted in three of the engines examined. The
quantity of anti-galling compound present varied between those
engines.
Lead oxybromide deposits and anti-galling compounds act in
different ways to weaken the defences for reliable engine
operation. The relative contribution to engine failure of the
factors cannot be predicted easily because of variations in the
extent of each effect and the complexity inherent in engine
assembly and operation. It is likely that the formation of lead
oxybromides that cause deposit induced preignition is linked to the
temperature of the fuel-air charge temperature in the combustion
chamber just prior to the passing of the flame front. Leaning the
mixture during climb, and using near "best economy" cruise power
settings appeared to favour the formation of lead oxybromide
deposits that resulted in deposit induced preignition. Mixture
settings of "full rich" mixture during climb and "best power"
cruise settings appeared to favour reactions that resulted in less
extensive and different deposits being formed. The Whyalla Airlines
procedure was to lean the mixture during climb, and to use a cruise
power setting close to "best economy". Those procedures were in
accordance with the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
approved Pilot's Operating Handbook for the Piper Chieftain
aircraft.
The combination of the use of leaded aviation gasoline, mixture
leaning during climb, and leaning for best economy during cruise
was not restricted to Lycoming engines. The ATSB also found
evidence of high combustion loads and lead oxybromide deposits
during the examination of components from two Teledyne Continental
TIO-520 engines that were defective.
Anecdotal reports indicated that there were fewer engine
problems (including component failures) in engines that were
operated full rich during climb, and "best power" during cruise,
compared with those where the mixture was leaned during climb and
"best economy" cruise power was used. A comparison of the engine
operating procedures of twelve other operators of Piper Chieftain
aircraft revealed considerable disparity in procedures,
particularly for climb and cruise. In fact, no two operators used
the same procedure.
The incidence of lead oxybromide deposits in engines that had
experienced defects, coupled with the range of fuel leaning
techniques used, indicated a deficiency in the operation and
maintenance of those engines, at least among some of the operators
of high-powered piston engine aircraft in Australia.
On 30 October 2000, the ATSB issued a recommendation that the
Civil Aviation Safety Authority alert operators regarding the risks
of detonation, and encourage the adoption of conservative fuel
leaning practices. This report includes further recommendations
addressing the following:
- the engine operating conditions under which combustion chamber
deposits that may cause preignition are formed (addressed to the US
Federal Aviation Administration);
- the effect on engine reliability of the use of anti-galling
compounds between connecting rod bearing inserts and housings
(addressed to the US Federal Aviation Administration and the engine
manufacturer); and
- the reliability of high-powered aircraft piston engines
operated in Australia (addressed to CASA).
This accident was the first recorded ditching involving a Piper
Chieftain aircraft in Australia. Available records world-wide of
previous Piper Chieftain engine failure/ditching events illustrate
that, in most instances, successful night ditchings occurred in
better visibility and weather conditions than those confronting the
pilot of MZK. The relatively minor injuries suffered by the
occupants of the aircraft indicated that the pilot demonstrated a
high level of skill in ditching the aircraft. The report includes a
recommendation to CASA regarding guidance material for pilots on
ditching.
It is likely that the survival prospects of the occupants would
have been enhanced had the passenger seats been fitted with upper
body restraints, and life jackets or equivalent flotation devices
had been available to the occupants. As a result of a separate
investigation, the Bureau issued a recommendation concerning upper
body restraints on 31 March 1999. On 30 October 2000, arising from
the Whyalla investigation, the ATSB issued recommendations to the
Civil Aviation Safety Authority concerning the provision of
adequate emergency and life saving equipment for the protection of
fare-paying passengers in smaller aircraft during over-water
flights.
Full details of safety action including the CASA response to
recommendations made on 31 March 1999 and 30 October 2000 are in
Section 4 of this report.
The investigation included a detailed examination of the
regulatory history of Whyalla Airlines from June 1997 to June 2000.
In common with the published findings of other reports on CASA
surveillance activities, there was a significant under-achievement
of surveillance of the company against CASA's planned levels during
that period. However, there was insufficient information to
conclude that the level of surveillance achieved was of
significance with respect to the accident.
With regard to Whyalla Airlines itself, issues were identified
in the company that had the potential to adversely influence
safety. There was insufficient information to conclude that any of
these issues were of significance with respect to the accident.
As a result of the accident and ATSB's investigation, improved
refuelling procedures were introduced nationally by the refuelling
organisation to reduce the chance of error.