Phoenix Cat
31st Oct 2008, 08:16
FROM WINDHOEK OBSERVER : 1 NOVEMBER 2008 EDITION
210 Crash in Olympia - final report released
By Yanna Erasmus
Windhoek: Thursday, October 30
The fatal Cessna 210 crash, known in local jargon as the ‘Olympia crash’ which took place on January 11 of this year and claimed six lives, had its final conclusion today when the official report was released by the Directorate of Aircraft Accident Investigations at the works ministry. Shortly after take-off, the fated V5-GWH registered 210, with a total of 4 303.7 hours on her clock, crashed into a home on the corner of Mosé Tjitendero and Esther Brand Streets.
According to the report, the aircraft took off from Eros Airport at about 15h20 for a chartered flight to Mokuti Lodge. The aircraft crashed and smashed through a garden wall of a residential house in the corner of Mosé Tjitendero and Ester Brand Street and exploded into flames. The pilot and his five passengers were incinerated.
Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.
According to Eros Air Traffic Control, the pilot requested to taxi to Runway 19 (the longest runway) but after being notified of down-draft south of the airport, reported by an aircraft taking-off on the same runway just prior to his own take-off, the tower controller told the pilot: “Runway 09 is available.”
The take-off clearance was to turn left after take-off, climb to 7500 ft and report at point ATZ (seven miles north).
The pilot asked the tower for the length of runway as it was reported to him as 1.5, he taxied to Runway 09 threshold.
While taxiing, the tower corrected the mistake and indicated that the actual length of the runway was 1 005 metres. After a short delay, the pilot reported that he would stick to his original plan that he intended to take-off from Runway 09.
At approximately 14h58, the pilot started the take-off run. The aircraft was with excessive weight and aft centre of gravity and this quite clearly caused a lighter-than-normal nose. For this reason, the aircraft lifted its nose at a distance of 2 200ft to 2 400ft, and the aircraft lifted off shortly after.
In the first 200 metres beyond the runway end, the ground surface descends, consisting of flight over an urban area with high buildings, lighting posts, electrical lines and antennas.
Since the pilot did not retract the landing gear and since it is doubtful that he retracted the flaps at this point, it could be determined that he could not gain any speed higher than 72 knots at an altitude above 50 ft and as a result, he could not achieve the figure allowing performance of these operations.
After a short distance of about half a mile from the runway, the pilot decided to turn left northbound, either because of the clearance or possibly the terrain north of the airport, which is somehow lower.
Turning with a bank angle above 10 degrees, the aircraft’s actual performance and the environmental conditions caused it to stall with higher stalling figures than those calculated by the pilot, due to excessive weight, high altitude, and high temperature.
The aircraft may have entered a stall that worsened until it crashed while turning left northbound, the pilot may have tried to lift the aircraft nose, but this was in vain. This conclusion is based on several eye witnesses saying they saw the aircraft trying to lift its notes before crash.
The aircraft at this point was uncontrollable. It continued its descent and hit the concrete slope of the house, killing all on board.
As it is known from the pilot logbook, the pilot flew only once to Eros airport, about a month prior to the accident. On that flight, he landed at the airport with five passengers and took off back to Swakopmund with no passengers.
The aircraft bore no fault of any kind and met all requirements as per the law.
Probable Cause
The investigation determined that the probable causes of this accident were:
The aircraft hit the ground at a speed significantly lower than stall speed which indicated with certainty that the pilot entered a slow stall resulting in a total loss of aircraft control upon impact.
Heavy and marginal take-off performance from a high altitude airport with high temperature soaring above 30 degrees Celsius and choosing a short runway for take-off.
Lack of experience as well as lack of briefing regarding the prevailing conditions and Eros airport limitations could explain the pilot’s surprise at the premature nose lifting during the take-off run.Contributing to the accident is attributed to:
Improper flight planning
Lack of situational awareness and poor airmanship
Unfamiliar with Eros Airport data
Not compensating for density altitude and airport surface conditions.
210 Crash in Olympia - final report released
By Yanna Erasmus
Windhoek: Thursday, October 30
The fatal Cessna 210 crash, known in local jargon as the ‘Olympia crash’ which took place on January 11 of this year and claimed six lives, had its final conclusion today when the official report was released by the Directorate of Aircraft Accident Investigations at the works ministry. Shortly after take-off, the fated V5-GWH registered 210, with a total of 4 303.7 hours on her clock, crashed into a home on the corner of Mosé Tjitendero and Esther Brand Streets.
According to the report, the aircraft took off from Eros Airport at about 15h20 for a chartered flight to Mokuti Lodge. The aircraft crashed and smashed through a garden wall of a residential house in the corner of Mosé Tjitendero and Ester Brand Street and exploded into flames. The pilot and his five passengers were incinerated.
Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.
According to Eros Air Traffic Control, the pilot requested to taxi to Runway 19 (the longest runway) but after being notified of down-draft south of the airport, reported by an aircraft taking-off on the same runway just prior to his own take-off, the tower controller told the pilot: “Runway 09 is available.”
The take-off clearance was to turn left after take-off, climb to 7500 ft and report at point ATZ (seven miles north).
The pilot asked the tower for the length of runway as it was reported to him as 1.5, he taxied to Runway 09 threshold.
While taxiing, the tower corrected the mistake and indicated that the actual length of the runway was 1 005 metres. After a short delay, the pilot reported that he would stick to his original plan that he intended to take-off from Runway 09.
At approximately 14h58, the pilot started the take-off run. The aircraft was with excessive weight and aft centre of gravity and this quite clearly caused a lighter-than-normal nose. For this reason, the aircraft lifted its nose at a distance of 2 200ft to 2 400ft, and the aircraft lifted off shortly after.
In the first 200 metres beyond the runway end, the ground surface descends, consisting of flight over an urban area with high buildings, lighting posts, electrical lines and antennas.
Since the pilot did not retract the landing gear and since it is doubtful that he retracted the flaps at this point, it could be determined that he could not gain any speed higher than 72 knots at an altitude above 50 ft and as a result, he could not achieve the figure allowing performance of these operations.
After a short distance of about half a mile from the runway, the pilot decided to turn left northbound, either because of the clearance or possibly the terrain north of the airport, which is somehow lower.
Turning with a bank angle above 10 degrees, the aircraft’s actual performance and the environmental conditions caused it to stall with higher stalling figures than those calculated by the pilot, due to excessive weight, high altitude, and high temperature.
The aircraft may have entered a stall that worsened until it crashed while turning left northbound, the pilot may have tried to lift the aircraft nose, but this was in vain. This conclusion is based on several eye witnesses saying they saw the aircraft trying to lift its notes before crash.
The aircraft at this point was uncontrollable. It continued its descent and hit the concrete slope of the house, killing all on board.
As it is known from the pilot logbook, the pilot flew only once to Eros airport, about a month prior to the accident. On that flight, he landed at the airport with five passengers and took off back to Swakopmund with no passengers.
The aircraft bore no fault of any kind and met all requirements as per the law.
Probable Cause
The investigation determined that the probable causes of this accident were:
The aircraft hit the ground at a speed significantly lower than stall speed which indicated with certainty that the pilot entered a slow stall resulting in a total loss of aircraft control upon impact.
Heavy and marginal take-off performance from a high altitude airport with high temperature soaring above 30 degrees Celsius and choosing a short runway for take-off.
Lack of experience as well as lack of briefing regarding the prevailing conditions and Eros airport limitations could explain the pilot’s surprise at the premature nose lifting during the take-off run.Contributing to the accident is attributed to:
Improper flight planning
Lack of situational awareness and poor airmanship
Unfamiliar with Eros Airport data
Not compensating for density altitude and airport surface conditions.