Airvan Skydiving Accident Sweden Final Report
Thread Starter
Airvan Skydiving Accident Sweden Final Report
Features else wear on Pprune, but think it deserves exposure here.
https://www.havkom.se/assets/reports...nal-report.pdf
https://www.havkom.se/assets/reports...nal-report.pdf
Swedish Airvan Accident
Rookie pilot, over gross MTOW, above FL13, no aux oxygen, aft CG, unrestrained jumpers, VFR into IMC, 'Push push', minimum pilot training, jump door closed.
All up an accident going somewhere to happen and it did.
Have seen it elsewhere.
All up an accident going somewhere to happen and it did.
Have seen it elsewhere.
... and CASA grounded Airvans because of it. Hindsight is great I guess.
Welcome back HD. Good analysis from someone that would know !
For someone who "has scrutinized the report in great detail" you seem to have missed that they do not state anywhere that CoG controls speed... However, they do note that trimming required a lot of revolutions of the trim wheel in an already high workload situation for an inexperienced pilot. Having jumpers sit far back in the cabin on the baggage shelf (where they were not allowed according to the AFM) would only exaggerate the change of CoG moving aft and resulting trim needed to maintain speed. They noted also it might take more time to trim then is available before dropping to or below stall speed. A more experienced pilot might act proactively and anticipate these changes, but we are dealing with a fresh pilot here.
Everything is connected as always. Blocking off the baggage shelf might have helped on this specific flight, preventing this specific accident. But it seems this was a bit of a lax operation anyway, and operating with some very small safety margins, likely due to lack of experience and skill of the person ultimately responsible, the PIC. So perhaps an accident would have happened at a later time still. But as always, this specific accident could very well have been stopped by removing one link of the chain such as the baggage shelf.
I also have some experience with the SHK people, and can tell you they are well informed, thorough and quite professional.
Everything is connected as always. Blocking off the baggage shelf might have helped on this specific flight, preventing this specific accident. But it seems this was a bit of a lax operation anyway, and operating with some very small safety margins, likely due to lack of experience and skill of the person ultimately responsible, the PIC. So perhaps an accident would have happened at a later time still. But as always, this specific accident could very well have been stopped by removing one link of the chain such as the baggage shelf.
I also have some experience with the SHK people, and can tell you they are well informed, thorough and quite professional.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: on the edge.
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3.1 Findings
a) The pilot was qualified to perform the flight, but had limited experience of the aeroplane type and of flying with parachutists.
b) The aeroplane had a valid Certificate of Airworthiness and a valid ARC.
c) No mass and balance calculation was conducted prior to the flight.
d) There was no functioning system for calculating mass and balance.
e) There was no formal training for pilots involved in parachute operations.
f) The aeroplane took off overloaded and with a centre of gravity aft of the permitted area.
g) The prevailing meteorological conditions made the flight more difficult.
h) The airspeed was low and decreasing when the aeroplane was approaching the jump point at the airport at flight level 136.
i) The centre of gravity moved aft, which made the aeroplane longitudinally statically unstable.
j) With around 30 seconds to go until the airport and where the jump point was located, the aeroplane stalled, made a sudden turn to the left and entered clouds in a rapid descend.
k) The aeroplane ended up in an uncontrolled state in the clouds.
l) There was little chance of regaining control of the aeroplane.
m)The speed exceeded 200 knots and large g-forces broke up the aeroplane.
n) In the final stage of the sequence of events, the aeroplane rotated in the horizontal plane with its left wing pointing up, while the right wing, stabiliser and fin were missing.
o) There was little chance of bailing out.
p) The crash was not survivable.
q) The altitude exceeded the limit at which oxygen is to be carried and used.
r) No technical faults on the aeroplane that could have contributed to the accident have been identified during the technical examinations.
Soo sad.
a) The pilot was qualified to perform the flight, but had limited experience of the aeroplane type and of flying with parachutists.
b) The aeroplane had a valid Certificate of Airworthiness and a valid ARC.
c) No mass and balance calculation was conducted prior to the flight.
d) There was no functioning system for calculating mass and balance.
e) There was no formal training for pilots involved in parachute operations.
f) The aeroplane took off overloaded and with a centre of gravity aft of the permitted area.
g) The prevailing meteorological conditions made the flight more difficult.
h) The airspeed was low and decreasing when the aeroplane was approaching the jump point at the airport at flight level 136.
i) The centre of gravity moved aft, which made the aeroplane longitudinally statically unstable.
j) With around 30 seconds to go until the airport and where the jump point was located, the aeroplane stalled, made a sudden turn to the left and entered clouds in a rapid descend.
k) The aeroplane ended up in an uncontrolled state in the clouds.
l) There was little chance of regaining control of the aeroplane.
m)The speed exceeded 200 knots and large g-forces broke up the aeroplane.
n) In the final stage of the sequence of events, the aeroplane rotated in the horizontal plane with its left wing pointing up, while the right wing, stabiliser and fin were missing.
o) There was little chance of bailing out.
p) The crash was not survivable.
q) The altitude exceeded the limit at which oxygen is to be carried and used.
r) No technical faults on the aeroplane that could have contributed to the accident have been identified during the technical examinations.
Soo sad.
Swedish Airvan Accident
When the aircraft pitched down the jumpers, who were not restrained, would have fallen in a untidy human mass up against the two front seats, unable to get to the skydive door to vacate the doomed machine.
Sure a cargo net preventing use of the baggage shelf would have pushed the CG forward before the stall. The rope with knots every few feet would (maybe, we will never know) have allowed some of those jumpers to haul themselves up to the exit door and maybe, maybe, exit before it hit terra firma. Yes, a $20 rope could have saved a few. The accident report does not tell us how the first responders found the jumpers. Were they just an untidy mass of bodies bunched up in the front of the aircraft? We were not told.
Sure a cargo net preventing use of the baggage shelf would have pushed the CG forward before the stall. The rope with knots every few feet would (maybe, we will never know) have allowed some of those jumpers to haul themselves up to the exit door and maybe, maybe, exit before it hit terra firma. Yes, a $20 rope could have saved a few. The accident report does not tell us how the first responders found the jumpers. Were they just an untidy mass of bodies bunched up in the front of the aircraft? We were not told.
