Runway excursion

The pilot and an approved testing officer were engaged in a commercial licence flight test. An aircraft landing area inspection of Wagin runway 06 and a touch-and-go landing were completed. This was followed by a period of instrument flying. The testing officer then gave the pilot a simulated engine failure, overhead Wagin airfield at 3500 ft. The pilot flew the aircraft to a short base leg for runway 34 at 1000 ft above ground level. Following the pilot's comment that the approach was high, the testing officer instructed him to do something about it. He lowered the nose and allowed the aircraft to accelerate whilst continuing the descent towards the strip. Speed over the runway threshold was faster than optimum and the aircraft landed, following a bounce, 600 m into the 1000 m strip.

As the pilot applied power to go around the testing officer observed powerlines across the departure end of the runway. He instructed the pilot to keep the aircraft on the ground, and they attempted to stop in the runway remaining. The runway surface included loose gravel and de-acceleration was poor. Main wheel skid marks were apparent for 300 m. The aircraft ran off the end of the runway and collided with a raised road surface and a water pipe. The left main and nose landing gear legs collapsed. The aircraft came to a complete stop 100 metres from the end of the runway.

The powerlines were not observed during the landing area inspection because it concentrated on runway 06 and not 34.

The testing officer later indicated that he had tried too hard to introduce some realism into the exercise. He had allowed a simulated situation to continue without ensuring that the aircraft could overshoot safely or stop within the runway confines, should it become necessary. The pilot had not taken independent action because he was under pressure to meet the test requirements and expected the more experienced testing officer to maintain a safety watch.

The pilot attempted to land his lightly loaded aircraft uphill on his 425-metre private airstrip with a slight tail wind. Threshold airspeed was slightly fast. The aircraft touched down long. The pilot soon realised that he could not stop the aircraft before the end fence. When he decided to go-around and applied power, the aircraft was too slow to become airborne before the fence. He then closed the throttle, and the aircraft ran through the fence.

The pilot reported that the aircraft was departing empty from the Snake Creek Fish Farm after delivering a load of freight. The main fuel tanks were 3/4 full and the auxiliary tanks were full. 

After the aircraft speed had passed Vmca and the aircraft was becoming airborne, the right engine failed. The pilot closed the throttles, selected the right propeller to feather, landed the aircraft and commenced braking. He assessed that insufficient runway remained for a successful stop, so he initiated a ground loop to the left. Just before the aircraft stopped, the nose leg struck a mound of earth that had been hidden in the grass. This caused the nose gear leg to collapse, and both propellers were damaged.

No reason for the engine failure could be established. The grass on the airstrip was long. This may have resulted in lower acceleration performance than the pilot had anticipated.

The airfield at which the aircraft was operating had a north/south strip, reported to be 800 metres long and an east/west strip, reported to be 1000 metres long. The wind was easterly at 10 to 15 kts. After despatching a load of parachutists, the pilot decided to land into the north. This involved using the shorter strip with a crosswind rather than landing on the longer strip into wind. He said he did this for two reasons. There was mechanical turbulence on short final approach for a landing into the east and after despatching the parachutists he was well positioned for a landing into the north. The north/south strip was more than long enough for landing.

Approach was at 70 knots with 40 deg of flap. While on approach, the pilot noticed a parachutist just off the left side of, walking parallel to, and approximately one third of the way along, the strip he was approaching. He continued approach but on very short final the parachutist started to walk across the strip. The pilot revved the engine to get the attention of the parachutist but when the parachutist finally saw the aircraft approaching, instead of immediately clearing the strip, he ran down the strip away from the aircraft for 20 to 30 metres before moving clear.

The pilot said he did not want to attempt a go-around because of powerlines off the end of the strip so he persisted with the landing, aiming to touch down just past the parachutist. The pilot said that after the initial touchdown, the aircraft bounced two or three times. Once on the ground, he applied full braking. The aircraft skidded, turned to the right and continued to skid out of control through a fence, finally coming to rest at the base of a tree.

The purpose of the flight was to conduct an aerial functional check of several water bores on the station property.

The pilot advised that the engine cowl inspection panel for the oil filler/dipstick came open in flight prior to arrival at the 4th bore. Because of the severity of the wind buffeting to the open panel, the pilot decided to land the aircraft at the airstrip adjacent to 4th bore to close the panel. Before landing he carried out an aerial inspection of the airstrip and assessed it as being suitable with adequate length available. On the first landing attempt some cattle crossed the strip, and a go-around was carried out. The second approach was conducted with power and full flap at 60 knots. The pilot advised that during the landing flare the aircraft continued to float along the runway. Once the aircraft was fully on the ground, he opted to continue with the landing rather than attempt a go around. The pilot applied heavy braking, however he was unable to prevent the aircraft overrunning the strip where the nose wheel entered a drainage ditch.

The pilot and passenger were able to exit the aircraft safely. Post flight examination found that the aircraft's nose gear attachment bracket was broken, and the firewall was buckled.

It was reported that the aircraft did not get airborne during the take-off from a field. The aircraft collided with trees at the end of the field. The reporter concluded that the field was too short. Repeated attempts to contact the pilot have been unsuccessful.

The pilot said he had over corrected when the aircraft was struck by a gusting crosswind during the take-off roll. This action caused the left wing to contact the runway, slewing the aircraft sideways. The aircraft then departed the runway sliding sideways before coming to rest, upright, within the cleared area of the flight path.

Both the pilot and the passenger were able to exit the aircraft safely.

The take-off was the first solo flight for the pilot after receiving endorsement on the type.

The aircraft received significant damage to the landing gear, propeller and wings.

The Cessna "Dragonfly" returned for a landing after a brief practice session in the training area. However, during that period the weather in the control zone had deteriorated, with visibility reduced in heavy rain associated with a passing thunderstorm. The aircraft was subsequently cleared to land on runway 29C. Although the touchdown was normal the aircraft failed to stop and overran the runway end, before colliding with the perimeter fence.

The pilot reported there had been a large quantity of standing water on the runway at the time of the occurrence. The loss of braking efficiency was consistent with aquaplaning. In addition, the pilot believed there had been a slight downwind component on the landing runway.

Upon arrival in the circuit, the pilot found that the windsock was wrapped around the pole. From local knowledge he chose to land on the 525m strip towards the north-west. Following touch down the aircraft did not slow down as rapidly as expected and overran the strip. The aircraft came to rest on a 30 degree slope just past the threshold.

Later the pilot said that the grass was wet, he landed slightly fast at 90 kts, there was a three to five knot tailwind, and he selected reverse thrust too late to avoid the overrun. The Cessna 208 flight manual recommends an approach speed of 78 kts under the prevailing conditions. The chart landing distance required was 397m.

The pilot flew the aircraft with an instructor on the day before the accident flight. The instructor said that the pilot had not flown recently, and the pilot had not previously flown a Beechcraft Debonair. The next day the pilot proceeded to Caloundra with two passengers as planned. Witnesses at Caloundra airport saw the aircraft approaching to land. The aircraft was very high over the runway, and when it was obvious a landing could not be accomplished, the pilot carried out a go-around. The aircraft was seen making a second approach which was also very high, but not as high as the first. The pilot continued the approach, and the aircraft was seen to flare high and fast. The aircraft then landed nosewheel first and "wheelbarrowed" along the runway. The witnesses said it appeared that the engine had not been throttled back, as the aircraft did not slow down until it ran off the end of the runway into soft ground causing the nose gear to collapse.

The pilot was contacted and said that he had submitted a report, however, no report has been received. A check with the operator and the insurance loss assessor revealed that they had not received a report.