What happened

On 1 June 2011, a Bell Helicopter 206B (III), registered VH-BHU (BHU), departed Mossman Sports Ground, Queensland for a local area charter flight. The flight was conducted as a weed spotting operation and there was one pilot and three passengers, acting as weed spotters, on board.

The aircraft was operating about 10-15 ft above the tree top level when the pilot initiated a slow left turn, and the helicopter struck a dual-line powerline. The pilot was unaware that there was a powerline in the vicinity prior to the collision. The pilot applied control inputs to keep the helicopter level as it descended though the tree canopy.

The helicopter landed in an upright position and the pilot and three passengers were able to exit. The pilot and one passenger sustained serious injuries, and the other two passengers sustained minor injuries.

As a result of the accident, the helicopter operator conducted a meeting to discuss the factors that led to the accident and highlight the hazards. They also issued a wire awareness information pack to all current pilots and modified the pilot briefing notifications to specifically highlight hazards when working at low level. The Operations Manual was also being updated to enhance the section on low level reconnaissance and changes were made to the Emergency Response Plan.

What happened

On 3 June 2011, a Kawasaki Heavy Industries 369HS helicopter, registered VH-XAA, collided with terrain 42 km west-south-west of Canberra Airport, New South Wales. The helicopter sustained serious damage and both occupants received injuries.

Earlier that day the helicopter had departed from a private helicopter landing site about 22 km north-west of Canberra Airport for defence aircrew currency training in the Brindabella Ranges, New South Wales. Pre-departure checks had been normal, and the weather was clear.

After identifying a suitable landing site in the Ranges, the pilot reported that he brought the helicopter into a high hover of about 50 -70 ft above ground level (AGL). He assessed that an adequate power margin existed prior to commencing a right tail rotor pedal turn through about 180° to position for landing. Approaching the required position, the pilot applied left tail rotor pedal to stop the turn, however, the helicopter continued to turn to the right. The pilot assessed that he had lost tail rotor effectiveness and commenced recovery actions, but this was hampered by the proximity of nearby trees. The helicopter continued the right yaw through a number of 360º turns while slowly descending. At about 30 ft AGL, the pilot assessed that collision with the trees was imminent and decided to conduct an emergency landing in the clearing below. The helicopter descended rapidly towards terrain and landed heavily in a level attitude, striking a large log. After rapidly rolling through trees then down a bank the helicopter came to rest in a creek bed.

Both occupants exited the helicopter and activated the portable emergency locator beacon. They were later airlifted out by a rescue helicopter.

What happened

On 16 January 2011, at about 1800 Eastern Standard Time, a De Havilland Aircraft DH-82A (Tiger Moth) aircraft, registered VH-WHW (WHW), departed Toowoomba, Queensland on a private local flight.

On board was the pilot in command (PIC) and a flying instructor from the local Aero Club. The PIC conducted a pre-flight inspection, which included a check of the fuel, oil and control cables. He determined that WHW was serviceable and had sufficient fuel for the flight. There were no loose items in the aircraft's storage locker or in the cockpit.

About 15 minutes after take-off, the flying instructor, who was acting as the handling pilot at the time, initiated a left turn to return to the airport. The PIC recalled that, during the turn, WHW suddenly pitched down followed by a second, even more severe, pitch down motion. Both the PIC and the handling pilot recalled that the control stick did not move when WHW pitched down.

In response to the sudden and uncommanded nose down motion, both pilots attempted to raise the nose by applying back pressure on the control stick. Their actions had no effect and WHW continued to pitch nose down until the aircraft became inverted.

The aircraft was about 100 ft above the trees and inverted when it began to climb. Both pilots felt significant g-force followed by the collision with the trees.

The aircraft came to rest upside down on the side of Mount Davidson in bushland. Both occupants sustained serious injuries.

Safety summary

What happened

On Saturday 28 May 2011, intermodal freight train 5MP9 was travelling from Melbourne to Perth when one of its locomotives (SCT class) experienced a catastrophic wheel failure near Fisher, South Australia. The locomotive did not derail but sections of the broken wheel damaged a traction motor and associated components. The train travelled about 1976 m after the wheel failed and caused some sleeper damage and four breaks in the rail. 

What the ATSB found

The investigation found that a fatigue crack had initiated at a small indentation on the inside of the wheel rim and then radiated towards the flange and tread regions before the wheel completely failed. 

The rate of growth of the fatigue crack was influenced by high in-service mechanical loading of the wheel. 

Inspection and measurement after the incident revealed that the locomotive wheel had sufficient rim, tread and flange thickness and was not worn beyond its service life, however it was likely the crack was present at a previous visual inspection and was not detected. 

What’s been done as a result

The locomotive owner and maintenance provider has advised that they have implemented a revised program for more regular wheel re-profiling of its SCT class locomotive wheels to remove surface stressors in the wheel rim. 

The locomotive maintenance program has also been enhanced to include a focus on visual inspections to detect impact damage to wheels and scheduled ultrasonic testing of locomotive wheels after mid-life is carried out when they are machined to detect cracks that may not be visible to the naked eye. 

Safety message

Operators of locomotives that are exposed to high in-service mechanical loadings should be aware of the potential for wheel failure due to fatigue cracking and ensure inspection and maintenance programs include techniques for detecting and assessing wheel defects with the potential to lead to fatigue cracks. 

The United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) requested assistance from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) in investigating the circumstances of an accident involving a Mooney M20R, with Australian registration, that collided with terrain shortly after takeoff from Hollister Municipal Airport, Hollister, California on 25 November 2010. The Australian pilot, the sole occupant, was fatally injured and the aircraft destroyed.

The NTSB request sought assistance in obtaining details of the pilot's experience and training. In accordance with clause 5.23 of Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the ATSB appointed an accredited representative to the NTSB investigation and initiated its own investigation under the Australian Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003. Details of the pilot's experience and training were provided to the NTSB.

The NTSB is responsible for releasing the final investigation report (docket WPR11FA059) and has advised that the NTSB investigation is complete, and that the investigation report will be released to the public in due course. When released, that report will be available via the NTSB website at www.ntsb.gov

______________

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

What happened

On 20 May 2011, a Qantas Airways Boeing 767-338 aircraft, registered VH OGR, was being operated on a scheduled passenger service from Melbourne, Victoria to Perth, Western Australia.

During the approach to runway 03 at Perth, the aircraft encountered turbulence over a 9 second period, with severe turbulence recorded for 3-4 seconds during that time; a go-around was conducted.

Two passengers, who were reportedly not wearing their seat belts at the time, sustained head injuries from coming into contact with a window reveal and an overhead locker. After landing, both passengers received medical attention, with one being transported to hospital.

As a result of this occurrence, the aircraft operator has advised the ATSB that they intend to present this incident at the Airservices Australia industry participation working group for discussion; to improve the dissemination of information relating to windshear events.

Generally, 99 per cent of people receive no injuries during a turbulence encounter; however, if passengers and cabin crew are not wearing their seatbelts, they can be thrown around without warning. Almost all in-flight turbulence injuries could be avoided by wearing a seatbelt and paying attention to any safety announcements made by the flight crew and cabin crew during the flight.

What happened

On 16 May 2011, while in the cruise, on a scheduled passenger flight from Changi Airport, Singapore, to Melbourne, Australia. The crew of the Qantas Airways, Airbus A380-842 (A380) aircraft, registered VH-OQI (OQI), noticed a significant discrepancy between the aircraft's fuel state and the fuel predictions. The crew monitored the fuel over the flight and determined that 3.8 Tonne of excess fuel had been used over a 6-hour period.

The excess fuel usage could not be explained.  Due to the potential for delays at Melbourne, the crew opted to divert to Adelaide Airport, where an uneventful landing was made.

Subsequent examination of the aircraft found no evidence of fuel leaks. Engine ground runs confirmed normal fuel flow to all engines. The flight data recorder was analysed by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, which confirmed fuel flow during the flight was in accordance with the commanded thrust.

Subsequent investigation by the manufacturer and operator identified that for a period of about 4 hours during the flight, the speed brake lever (SBL) was set away from its stowed position of -5° to the +3.6°position. As a result, the aircraft spoilers were deflected into the airstream increasing drag and consequently fuel burn. The crew were not alerted to this as warnings are only displayed to the crew at or above the +5° SBL position.

As a result of the incident, Airbus plans to reduce the alerting position of the speed brake lever angle from +5° to +2.4°.

Airbus have also updated the standard operating procedures (SOP) to highlight that spoiler extension may occur without a crew alert.

What happened

On 13 May 2011, at 1606 Eastern Standard Time, an Aérospatiale Eurocopter AS 350B3 helicopter, registered VH-XXW, impacted terrain at Bankstown Airport, New South Wales. As the result of the post-impact fire, the helicopter sustained serious damage.

The owner-pilot had earlier completed an 'air transit' at about 15-20 ft above ground level (AGL), from outside a hangar, to a grassed area south-west of the main helipad.

While stationary in a hover, with a recorded 15 kt wind onto the right front of the helicopter, and at about 10 ft AGL, the pilot decided to land on the grass. When the helicopter was about 2 ft AGL, the pilot stated that it suddenly rotated to the left in an anticlockwise direction. The pilot was unable to correct the anticlockwise yaw with progressive right pedal input. The pilot then raised the collective lever and climbed to about 10 ft AGL, completing about three to four, 360 º rotations.

At the same time, the pilot noticed the helicopter drifting towards a chain-wire fence adjacent to a freight building. During the uncontrolled anticlockwise yaw, the pilot reported that there were no visual or aural warnings. While still rotating, the pilot decided to conduct a forced landing and slowly lowered the collective lever. The helicopter contacted the ground, rolled onto its right side and was seriously damaged from the post-impact fuel fed fire. The pilot sustained minor injuries.

What happened

On 15 February 2011, during a scheduled passenger service from Singapore to London, United Kingdom, the flight crew of an Airbus A380-842 aircraft, registered VH-OQC, observed a decrease in oil quantity on the number-4 engine. The aircraft was about 3 hours into the cruise near Delhi International Airport.

What happened

On 25 November 2010, a De Havilland Canada DHC-8-202 aircraft, registered VH-SDA (SDA), was taxied to runway 03 at Port Macquarie, New South Wales for a scheduled passenger service to Sydney.

After lining up on runway 03, the pilot in command (PIC) of SDA observed a traffic return on the aircraft's traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) indicating that an aircraft was behind them, about 400 ft above and descending. As a precaution, the take-off was expedited.

At the same time, a Beech Aircraft Corporation 58 aircraft, registered VH-VFG (VFG), was on final approach to runway 03. After observing SDA commence the take-off, the crew initiated a go-around and positioned the aircraft to the right of the runway centre line to maintain separation with SDA.

At about 600 ft, the crew of SDA noted that the TCAS was indicating that VFG was about 100 ft above and climbing. The PIC of SDA discontinued the aircraft's climb and turned left onto a westerly heading.

Both crews attempted to contact each other on the Port Macquarie common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) but received no response. The crews eventually established communications on the Brisbane Centre frequency.

Following the incident, the copilot of SDA reported that he may have mistuned the CTAF prior to taxiing. A subsequent engineering inspection by the operator determined that the aircraft's radio transceiver was faulty.

The operator of SDA has advised the ATSB, that as a result of this incident, a safety alert was issued to pilots emphasising the radio requirements for when operating on the CTAF. In addition, the operator also intends to conduct a review of their CTAF operating procedures.