On 9 April 2014, a Quest Aircraft Company Kodiak 100 registered PK-SDF collided with terrain during take off from Doyo Baru Airstrip, Jayapura, Papua Indonesia. The accident destroyed the aircraft and fatally injured the two occupants.

The National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) of Indonesia is responsible for investigating this accident. The aircraft was fitted with advanced cockpit instrumentation that included a flight data logging function. Although subjected to significant fire damage, the cockpit instrumentation and associated avionics were recovered by on site investigators and transported to the NTSC facilities for further examination. Examination of the instruments revealed remnants of non-volatile memory devices that were fitted to the cockpit displays.

The NTSC requested specialist assistance from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) to attempt the recovery of flight data from the non-volatile memory chips fitted to the cockpit instrumentation.

In accordance with clause 5.23 of Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (ICAO Annex 13) the ATSB appointed an Accredited Representative to assist the NTSC and initiated an investigation under the Australian Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003.

Examination of the instrument display components indicated they had suffered significant heat exposure resulting in the memory device packaging melting. The examination revealed parts of the memory device were present in the display components, however the memory chip could not be located. Consequently no accident flight data could be recovered to assist the NTSC investigation team. Preliminary results were conveyed to the Head of Aviation Sub Committee and a final report provided in November 2014.

The National Transportation Safety Committee of Indonesia is responsible for releasing a final investigation report regarding this occurrence. Contact details for the NTSC are:

National Transportation Safety Committee Office

Ministry Of Transportation Republic Of Indonesia
Transportation Building 3rd Floor
Jalan Medan Merdeka Timur No. 5
Jakarta Pusat 10110
Indonesia

Phone : +62 21 384 7601
Fax : +62 21 351 7606
Email : knkt@dephub.go.id

 

______________

Released in accordance with section 25 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003.

What happened

On 27 October 2014, at about 1030 Eastern Daylight-savings Time (EDT), a Cessna 172 aircraft, registered VH-ZZD departed Ballarat, Victoria, for Luskintyre, New South Wales, on a private flight under the visual flight rules. The pilot refuelled at Wangaratta, Victoria, and took a break for refreshments at Temora, New South Wales. As he neared Kandos, New South Wales, the pilot elected to track directly to Luskintyre, rather than follow his planned route which took him over a number of towns further north.

The direct track between Kandos and Luskintyre was over heavily treed and undulating terrain, leaving the pilot unable to positively visually fix his position. As he continued in an easterly direction, the pilot grew increasingly concerned about the possibility of infringing controlled airspace further to the east. Rather than risk infringing controlled airspace, the pilot decided to make a precautionary landing to ascertain his position. The pilot commented that precautionary landing options were very limited, but he ultimately selected a paddock that was clear of obstacles, and while relatively short, it offered an uphill landing run to assist in stopping the aircraft.

During his approach to land on the selected paddock, with full flap selected, the pilot found himself overshooting the selected aim point. Concerned that he would not be able to land safely, the pilot elected to discontinue the approach and commenced a go-around. As the go-around proceeded however, the aircraft collided with a line of trees on rising terrain beyond the far end of the selected paddock. The aircraft was substantially damaged, and the pilot received serious injuries. The aircraft wreckage was discovered by a local resident around 2 hours after the accident, independent of other search and rescue activities.

Pilots unsure of their position or requiring navigational assistance, are encouraged to seek Flight Following services from ATC. In this case, contact with ATC may have allayed the pilot’s concerns about the prospect of infringing controlled airspace, and negated the need to consider a precautionary landing. With respect to precautionary landings, pilots are encouraged to initiate an early go-around given any doubt regarding the prospects of a safe landing.

Aviation Short Investigations Bulletin - Issue 39

On 23 June 2014, a Eurocopter Deutschland BO-105 helicopter, registration P2-NHW, was conducting village-to-village sling-load operations in mountainous terrain in Morobe Province of Papua New Guinea. While on approach to land at the remote village of Onggake, the helicopter’s number-one engine sustained a power loss that required the pilot to conduct a forced landing. There were no injuries. On-site examination of the helicopter revealed that significant internal damage had occurred to the compressor assembly from the number-one engine, a Rolls-Royce M250-C20B turboshaft.

The Papua New Guinea Accident Investigation Commission (PNG AIC) commenced an investigation into the accident and subsequently, technical support was requested from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) in the examination of the compressor assembly. In providing this support, the ATSB commenced an external investigation under the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003.

The initial disassembly and examination of the compressor was conducted at the ATSB’s technical facilities in Canberra. The parts were subsequently sent to the engine manufacturer in the United States for detailed metallurgical examination. Reports from both the engine manufacturer and the ATSB were provided to the PNG-AIC to assist with the investigation.

The PNG Accident Investigation Commission is responsible for and will administer the release of the final investigation report into this accident.

Further information regarding the occurrence can be found at www.aic.gov.pg or specific enquiries should directed to infor@aic.gov.pg.

Double-click on icon above to open formatted ASOR report document. Last amended 12 Nov 2004 (post ED review to include dates). ?? ?? ?? ?? 1

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS INVESTIGATION REPORT 200404065 Recovery and Presentation of Recorded Data for the Transport Accident Investigation Commission New Zealand Hughes 369HS, ZK-HCC Accident near Fox Glacier, New Zealand 30 November 2003 Factual Information On 30 November 2003, a New Zealand registered Hughes 369HS, ZK-HCC, was operating on a standard scenic flight over the Fox Glacier, New Zealand. The intended track was over Fox Glacier, around Mount Cook and Mount Tasman, returning via the Fox Glacier to land at Fox Glacier township. After a normal climb to 9,500 ft and commencing level forward flight, the pilot noticed the power turbine speed and main rotor speed reduce. The pilot descended to 6,500 ft where power was restored. Several minutes later a second power loss occurred. The pilot then carried out an emergency landing at the base of Fox Glacier. During the emergency landing the helicopter sustained damage to a landing gear skid and rolled onto its side. The pilot and passengers vacated the helicopter with no serious injuries. A passenger had been photographing the scenic flight using a video camera. Sounds relating to the operation of the main rotor gearbox had been recorded on the video. The Transport Accident Investigation Commission (TAIC) of New Zealand was responsible for investigating this accident and requested assistance from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) to analyse the sounds recorded on the video camera. It was requested that the data be presented in tabular and graphical format. The Executive Director of the ATSB approved the request and the examination was conducted in accordance with the Australian Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003. A copy of the video recorded during the accident flight was forwarded to the ATSB by the TAIC aviation investigator in charge. The video was received at the Bureau on 24 February 2004 and examined by an ATSB recorder specialist. The audio signals were downloaded and analysed using the Bureau's audio software and graphical and tabular presentations of the data were prepared. Information relating to the operation of the helicopter's main rotor system was provided to the TAIC investigator in charge for consideration in preparing their report. A copy of the TAIC investigation report (03-007) may be found at: www.taic.org.nz or by contacting the Transport Accident Investigation Commission, PO Box 10-323, Wellington, New Zealand.

The crew of the Airbus Industrie A340 responded to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) resolution advisory (RA) and climbed 600 ft above the cleared level of flight level (FL)190. The conflicting traffic was a formation of military McDonnell Douglas Corporation FA-18A Hornet aircraft in transit through a military airspace corridor. Traffic information was passed to the crew of the A340 by the air traffic controller. The Hornet crews were on military control frequencies. At the time of the TCAS alert, the Hornets had climbed to FL180 from FL170 to transit civil airspace via a military airspace corridor 75km north of Sydney, known as the Hunter Corridor. Civil radar data indicated that the Hornets climbed to FL183 and military radar data indicated a climb to FL182. The crews stated that they were positive that they had levelled at FL180, and that they had the A340 in sight. Analysis of the radar data indicated that, at the time of the resolution advisory, the standard vertical separation had reduced to less than 1000ft resulting in an infringement of separation standards.

The pilot-in-command of the Cessna 210 suffered a seizure which rendered him unconscious. He was subsequently unable to safely control the aircraft. The geoscience operator, who was also a rated pilot and was sitting in the right seat of the aircraft, took control of the aircraft and diverted to and landed safely at Bourke. The geoscience operator had to continually prevent the pilot-in-command's body from inadvertently fouling the flight controls during the return flight to Bourke. After the aircraft landed, the pilot regained consciousness and underwent medical treatment. Later the same day the pilot suffered another seizure and was hospitalised for a short period.

The investigation by The Netherlands authorities is continuing. The ATSB has completed its contribution to the investigation and plans to publish a copy of the final report on the ATSB website www.atsb.gov.au when it is received from The Netherlands.

The investigation by the Italian authorities is continuing. The ATSB has completed its contribution to the Italian investigation and plans to publish a copy of the final report on the ATSB website www.atsb.gov.au when it is received from the Italian authorities.

After the interim completion of agricultural spraying operations, the property owner asked the pilot to disperse one load of insecticide over a neighbour's property. The adjacent property owner had requested this work to be done. As the pilot hover-taxied an Agusta-Bell 47G-3B1 helicopter towards a water replenishing point on the neighbour's property, the cockpit bubble and one main rotor blade of the helicopter struck an unseen single strand high-tension power line partially concealed by a shed. The pilot was able to maintain control of the helicopter and landed safely. The helicopter sustained minor wire impact damage to one main rotor blade, the main rotor mast, and one tail rotor blade. The pilot and passenger escaped without injury. The water tanks were near a shed which partially concealed the wire which was at an angle of about 45 degrees to a height of 60 to 70 feet AGL. The wire also blended into the background foliage. The pilot had visited this section of the neighbour's property about 2 years ago. No wires were noted during this visit. The owner of the adjacent property had not briefed his neighbour to inform the pilot about a new wire that had been erected near the water tanks. Consequently, the pilot had not been adequately briefed by the other property owner as to the presence and location of the recently erected wire which was in close proximity to the water tanks.