Islander crash in Antigua
 

An Islander belonging to Fly Montserrat crashed on take off at VC Bird International yesterday at about 1600 hrs. The pilot and two passengers were killed and a male passenger is critically ill in hospital. There was considerable lightning around the airport at the time but of course we will only know the cause after a proper investigation. It will be strange not hearing the plane over my house 4 times a day.

I would believe this is the one you are referring to. Not good.

Crash: Montserrat BN2P at Antigua on Oct 7th 2012, lost height after takeoff

Wreckage suggests a nose-over. Amazing that the wing is essentially in one piece but folded forward 45 degrees. Everything ahead of the wing crushed - everything behind the wing virtually undamaged.

Stall? Sudden pilot incapacitation?

Weather indicates highly variable winds (swinging through 200° range) and CBs in the area (Tropics can get very small, localized CBs).

Winds closest to the time of the accident (190, 260) seem to NOT favor the runway normally used in the normal easterly trade-winds (07) and apparently used for this takeoff. But with CBs nearby, winds can change a lot in 15 minutes.

All suggestive - but insufficient data....

EDIT - but of course engine failure fits the known data as well.

I saw the wreckage at the end of 07 during take-off. Not nice.

A colleague watched the whole incident, his opinion was that the aircraft lost climb gradient and was crabbing indicative of a right engine failure.

Whilst the TAF's allude to inclement weather the weather at the field at the time was benign.

All IMHO of course.

A very sad day, the pilot was a likeable young chap. :sad:

latest report
 

Good news is that the surviving passenger is recovering well in Antigua's public hospital. Several reports suggest the aircraft yawed to the right on take off which supports several witnesses reports that the right engine lost power.

Any updates?
 

Anyone has any updates on this incedent? I am looking at the UK AAIB ( Air Accidents Investigation: Foreign Reports ) but have yet to seee anything mentioned. I take a personal interest in this one because I am Montserratian and I fly for pleasure.

Too early, expect to see it in the monthly bulletin in 2 or 3 months or maybe a year if they do a full investigation.

new pic i came across online
 

http://assets.antiguaobserver.com/2012/10/crash.jpg

Just came accross this from the Antigua Observer online, seems to me that the starboard engine might not have been running at the time of impact. Anybody else agree?

Yes indeed, the right Prop is not curled so the failure of the right engine seems to be confirmed, but why ? I guess the investigation will tell. I'm amazed to see so many survivable T/O engine failures leading to Death. While instructing ME I emphasize all the time (I mean it, all the time to the point that other instructors will warn my students..."he's going to saturate you with engine failure BLAH BLAH...) You often have very few precious seconds to react and take appropriate action. I'm not a BN2 guy, I know that they do not do very well on one :(engine, coupled with hot weather and perhaps a heavy load.One accident that I remember is The 737-200 out of Tamanrasset Algeria, Air Algérie Flight 6289 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Capt didn't do a single thing to save the aircraft after loosing one engine, he spent the last seconds of his life yelling at the female co-pilot to "let go" when in fact she had relinquished the control. Of course, on paper the Capt was a great pilot with thousand of hours, former military etc... etc.... but couldn't fly a distressed plane for a few minutes when the plane was flyable.....:ugh:


The very same plane VP-MON had a similar mishap with a better outcome last year in Montserrat. Here is the link to the previous accident report.

Air Accidents Investigation: Download PDF document

This report is "A MUST READ" very educational and puts in perspective the operational environment.
A month prior, there was another mishap by the same operator, same type due to the failure of the braking system. Air was trapped in the hydraulic line post maintenance to replace an O-ring. I guess the proper procedure to bleed the line was not observed..... Link to that report below.

Air Accidents Investigation: Download PDF document

Would a turboprop cost that much more to operate?

Yes Yes Yes, Acquisition cost higher, more qualified maintenance required, higher fuel cost, higher insurance premiums....To fly a 35nm leg, with 3 passengers or so I don't see why you would spend $$$ for a turboprop. You're right, properly maintained it would probably be a safer choice but, when it comes to $ , it is what it is.....The only turboprop aircraft's I would even consider for an operation out of Montserrat are the DO-228 or DH-C6 both multimillion $ machines or perhaps a C208 Grand Caravan but I'm not sure if the Regs allows for single engine Commercial Ops there, maybe someone can tell us. There is a variant of the BN2 fitted with Allison Turbo props, or a few Partenavias (I think called Spartacus also fitted with Allison 250SHP turbines) they are of course both very expensive compared to the piston BN2's and would reduce the profit margin. Then if your maintenance dpt can't properly bleed brake hydraulic lines, why complicate the operation by introducing more complicated machines :confused:

Preliminary report out
 

Preliminary Report on FlyMontserrat Crash | CARIBARENA ANTIGUA

I live here. It matters. Flown with pilot often. Now watch the blame-game start.

Does this not conflict with the brake failure Accident Report?
 

"I guess the proper procedure to bleed the line was not observed....." I read it as there is no "proper" procedure, but several......

I've been around Islanders a while and the brakes can be a real problem to bleed sometimes if the hydraulic lines have been drained.
If the 'O' rings have got to be replaced, the best way is to use a hose clamp as close to the union nut as possible and use a blanking plug once the line's disconnected. Take off the brake unit, replace the 'O' rings on the bench and fill it with an oil can. Then refit it and hopefully there's only five minutes of bleeding to eliminate the air. The biggest problem - BN having the bleed nipple at the bottom of the brake unit... no wonder air can't be purged easily. :rolleyes:
The brake units have the option of interchanging the pressure and bleed ports so it's not Cleveland's fault.
To be honest, I think the Islander is pretty dismal in respect of some design and maintenance tasks as well as having inferior manuals, compared to American documentation. BN don't seem interested in improvements to anything.
Anyway, this thread is about the tragic incident, not engineering gripes.

To stop the speculation, here's a copy of the initial report from the ECCAA:

The preliminary report from the Eastern Caribbean Civil Aviation Authority into the fatal plane crash on 7 October is printed below.

The substantive investigation into the crash is ongoing. The Governor’s Office will immediately release further details to the public as they become available.

preliminary report
ECCAA No.7AC/1/99

ACCIDENT
Aircraft Type and Registration: Britten-Norman BN2A-26 Islander, VP-MON serial number 082)

No & Type of Engines: 2 Lycoming O-540-E4C5 piston engines

Year of Manufacture: 1969

Location V.C. Bird International Airport, Antigua (TAPA)

Date & Time (UTC): 7 October 2012 at 2010 hrs

Type of Flight: Commercial Air Transport (Passenger)

Persons on Board: Crew: 1 Passengers: 3

Injuries: Crew 1 (fatal)
Passengers 2 (fatal)
1 (serious)

Nature of Damage: Aircraft destroyed

Commander's Licence: Commercial Pilot’s Licence

Commander's Age: 31 years

Commander's Flying Experience: 710 hours total of which 510 were on type
Last 28 days- 25 hours
Last 24 hours – 0.5 hours

Information Source: ECCAA Accident Investigation

All times in this report are UTC; Antigua time is UTC - 4 hrs

The investigation

The Eastern Caribbean Civil Aviation Authority was informed of the accident immediately, and senior staff attended the accident site without delay.





The Eastern Caribbean Civil Aviation Authority began an investigation under the Antigua and Barbuda Civil Aviation Regulations 2004. In accordance with established international arrangements, the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the United Kingdom, representing the State of Design and Manufacture of the aircraft, and (through its registration in a British Overseas Territory) the State of Operator, appointed an Accredited Representative to participate in the investigation. The AAIB Accredited Representative is supported by an AAIB Advisor. Britten-Norman, the aircraft manufacturer, has been informed of the accident and has offered assistance. Air Safety Support International (ASSI)1, which performs regulatory oversight of the aircraft operator, has been informed of the accident and is cooperating with the investigation. Montserrat Airways Limited, the operator, is also cooperating with the investigation.
Initial investigative activity focused on examination of the aircraft wreckage and accident site, gathering of evidence from witnesses, and examination of technical records. Further investigation will encompass all operational and engineering matters relevant to the accident. A comprehensive accident report will be published in due course.

History of the flight
The aircraft, which had flown earlier during the day, was on a commercial air transport (passenger) flight from V.C. Bird International Airport, Antigua (TAPA), to John A. Osborne Airport, Montserrat (TRPG), with the pilot and three passengers on board. Weather conditions at the time of departure were good, though convective clouds and heavy rain showers had passed over the airport while the aircraft was parked before flight.
Shortly after takeoff, the aircraft was observed to yaw to the right, and to cease climbing. The aircraft then descended rapidly, apparently out of control. The aircraft impacted the ground within the airport perimeter, right wingtip first and steeply banked to the right, at low forward speed. Ground marks and damage to the wing tips and nose indicate that the aircraft cart-wheeled before coming to rest erect. The fuselage forward of the wings was destroyed; there was comparatively less damage to the rear part of the aircraft.
The pilot and two passengers, both of whom were seated in the forward part of the cabin, were fatally injured. Another passenger, seated in the rear-most row of seats, was seriously injured and taken to hospital for treatment.
Examination of the wreckage indicates that the number two (right-hand) engine was not producing power at the time of impact, and investigation of the fuel system feeding that engine found significant quantities of water.
Following failure of one of the two engines on the Islander aircraft, the failed engine’s propeller should be feathered, to reduce the drag produced. Following successful feathering, continued flight should be possible. Examination of the right-hand propeller showed that it was not in the feathered position.
1 ASSI is a wholly-owned, not-for-profit, subsidiary of the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority (UK CAA)



This bulletin contains facts which have been determined up to the time of issue. This information is published to inform the aviation industry and the public of the general circumstances of accidents and must necessarily be regarded as tentative and subject to alteration or correction if additional evidence becomes available.

Extracts can be published without specific permission providing that the source is duly acknowledged.

© copyright East Caribbean Civil Aviation Authority 2012

Read more: Preliminary Report on FlyMontserrat Crash | CARIBARENA ANTIGUA

Thanks for the report Gooneyone, now we have the element of water contamination + possible pilot actions (prop not feathered, pre-flight ?). How difficult is it to drain water on the BN2 ? I remember that some cessna (or maybe piper, it's been so long) aircrafts with bladder type fuel tanks were prone to keep water due to internal wrinkles so during pre-flight no water:ok:, during the climbout water poured into the system cutting the engine (s) off :}!

Dear "procrastinator" regardless of procedure (s), you may have 100's; it doesn't matter ->the end result must be properly functioning brakes. When the system is not bled properly and air is present you will not have optimal pressure applied to the calipers hence a degraded braking action commensurate with the amount of air trapped in the line as air is compressible. So after the pilot complained about the right brake, a pretty good hint that something was wrong, the mechanic replaced the O-rings and released the aircraft back into operation without the proper wait period !! obviously someone dropped the ball ; A proper braking test should have been performed. All the Procedures are effective, a well trained mechanic should be able to cope with the braking system, they are many BN2's in operation out there and their mechanics seems to be able to bleed the lines properly... We are all airmen an have an interest in learning from this sad event. Hopefully the final report will tell the whole story regardless of who knows who or any sensitivities.

Say what????

Huck, is it about the 200hr commercial (common outside USA) or the Part 135 or equivalent regs (ex-JAR ops required more TT/ME PIC, so does US FAA) ? I'm not sure under what country's regs or 'copy of' the aircraft was operated, so can't tell. I'd be interested to know, too.

I'm not talking about the sad accident outcome, neither mx stuff, nor the pilot's abilities, or connecting any of the earlier. Just interested to know the regs governing air taxi/charter ops in this case.

Of course ! That's the answer ! Turbprop engines on a twin never fail on take-off.

Why didn't we all think of that ?

I have a few hundred hours flying the BN2a26 (piston), I think VP-MON was a piston also? Regarding VMCA it is 43 knots. Climb on single engine with flaps up on one engine, propellor feathered, YVSE is 65 knots.
Clearly from the pictures the right engine was not feathered. Whilst in flight I have had a right engine loose power and yaw is significant however rudder, right to left everything forward (then left to right having identified, verified feather the engine). On my flight as I was in the cruise I trouble shooted before feather, I applied carb heat and within a few seconds (felt like forever)power was restored. It focussed my mind though. I have also shut down an engine (again starboard) at FL12 feathered the engine and she flies perfectly well albeit in this case I was in the descent - the piston Islander will only maintain 5300ft on one engine.
Water ingress. Our Islander suffers from water ingress espiecally after heavy rain. The seal around the fuel cap is the normal culprit (and yes we get it changed regurlary). There are 4 fuel drains on the ac. Often after rain we can remove several drains full of water - you have to be very careful you actually have fuel. Also due to the baffling water will rest inside the tank, sometimes we taxi the aircraft and do more fuels drains.
In this case it was reported there had been heavy rain just before the accident, a possible cause might thus be water ingress. If starboard engine failed or lost power shortly after take off the pilot must react quickly with considerable rudder and everything forward, flaps up, then the rest of the immediate actions. She should be manageable espiecally with a VMCA of 43 knots unless there were other problems.

Fly Montserrat have to operate in accordance with the UK Air Navigation (Overseas Territories) Order and associated Overseas Terriories Aviation Requirements (OTARs). The relevant OTARs can be found here.

C195, in this case straight ahead was the sea. R/way 07 departure is overr the sea with the departure end just a short distance from the water's edge.

I understand, but, I suppose a controlled forced ditching would be better than loss of control.

These guys could have operated a Twotter with no issues

Why pick a dog?

$$$$$$$$$$$ !!! VP-MON was 43 years old. A brand new Twotter or DO-228 cost about !8M US$ used about 2M US$ so when you can get a BN2 for 200K US$, do the math. The BN2 properly maintained and operated is adequate for most Caribbean OPS. The Montserrat runway is quite challenging, for that reason I would never board one of those planes to that destination as well as other short and crazy airstrips in the region (Saba island:E). I always do my research before embarking on my "air ventures in the Carib..." and many times opted for a safer....... boat ride:8.

Following another landing incident today Fly Montserrat have been grounded.

Fly Montserrat grounded by regional aviation authority | The Trinidad Guardian Newspaper

Hard to see any reason to ground them based on the statement above. Mind you it has been an awfully long time since I last flew a BN2A.

From Caribarena.com news portal;

Link to the the latest incident and photo:
UK Investigators Lead FlyMontserrat Probe | CARIBARENA ANTIGUA

Hmmm, 3 runway excursions in less than 2 years (w/Official reports...:}) an airplane is normally supposed to land and stop on the runway :E so when the brakes fail to slow the aircraft down, and the pilot use the up-sloping terrain and grass as an emergency brake:ok: the authorities will frown upon your operation :=.

Although Saba is a challenging airport, if you consider that there have been no accidents at this airport in it's history (50+ years?) I'd say it's pretty safe to fly there.

Winair is the only scheduled service and I can personally attest to the very high experience and training requirements that Captains require to fly in there. As well, there are very strict and conservative wind guidelines for both landing and take-off.

Montserrat is not nearly as challenging as Saba. As for the training/culture of FlyMontserrat...I'm not sure

Indeed that kind of record speaks for itself :ok:, I'm sure that Winair is a well run Operation, However you are not going to find me (unless dire emergency:{) on a plane landing in Saba, it is inherently a dangerous airport and we all know that there are sometimes situations well beyond the best pilot or aircraft capabilities, and there is little margin for error there, so for me a slow boat ride:cool: is preferable to changing my diapers upon landing :} ...

For 17PA; it may seem that way to the naked eye. I am not too sure about Montserrat's SOP's but usually for the Bare Noise 2 (BN-2) Vr 65kts; climb out 85 kts(which is more than the blue line); pass 1000AGL 100kts cruise climb.

Melax, I think your speeds are very optimistic. Take off safety speed 65 kts agreed, climb is usually 70 kts. I am unaware of a Bn2 that will achieve 100 kts cruise climb - certainly not loaded to max payload. Vy is 75 kts. POH indicates 95 kts for a comfortable climb but at max weight I suspect the rate of climb will be bearly 100/200 fpm.

Yo Mosquito, I'm not a BN2 Guy, I never cited any speeds in my posts, Maybe you're addressing Nightwolf ?:confused:

I was taught , and have always practiced ,using the full RLA and it has served me well over the years. The saying goes " any rwy behind you on the roll is the most useless real estate in the world".
Also a proper W&B within the C of G limits is critical ,for max effective control ,during T/O with an engine failure.
A pre T/O briefing should be done on every flt to help you visualize and review your options.

Never become complacent. Life is too darn good to waste on dying.

Melax - profuse apologies. Indeed, comment directed to Nightwolf.:ok:

Hmm.

Last I checked, in just about any piston twin, (at rotation, shy of a positive rate and gear up), an engine failure is always managed thus regardless of whether there is adequate runway remaining or not.

I've never not seen it taught in training.

I have a lot of time in islanders in Alaska, there is no vmc on islanders it's below the stall speed which if I remember right is 39kts, vx,vy, with one engine or both running is the same 65kts, this airplane at gross weight with one engine at idle make a full takeoff in less than 2000ft , done it for check ride.not to point a finger but this is one of the safest airplanes I know of

I flew an Islander in HongKong ( KaiTak ) for many years.The takeoff brief always concluded with "in the event of an engine failure, fire or other serious malfunction after takeoff I will land straight ahead if sufficient runway is available" This was deemed sacriledge by CAD who said that after V1 a single-engine climb was always required as nobody could accurately judge the amount of runway left available and whether or not it would be sufficient. Suffice to say that if 9,000 feet or so was available I would be landing on it in the event of engine failure or similar emergency. Airmanship is only commonsense after all is said and done.

Happened to an HS748 at Stansted a number of years ago. Massive engine fire after rotation but before the wheels were retracted. Crusty captain took control from FO (whose instinct was to do the EFATO drills) i.e. clean-up and climb away on one. Captain thought otherwise and landed on what was left of the runway ahead. Wise move.....

Later evidence suggested that they might not have had time to do even an abbreviated circuit before the spar burned through. The ac was totaled but all survived.:ok:

Moral of the story......use the whole lenght of the runway every time even if under 99.999% of take-offs you won't need it. Runway behind you ain't much good when you need it in front. Same goes for fuel in the tanks......but that's another story!