Zone

Crash of a GAF Nomad N.22B in Leongatha

Date & Time: Apr 5, 1990 at 0645 LT
Type of aircraft:
Registration:
VH-DNM
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Schedule:
Leongatha - Leongatha
MSN:
25
YOM:
1976
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
On completion of temporary repairs following a forced landing accident in a paddock, a permit to fly was issued authorising a ferry flight from the accident site to a nearby strip. During the take off roll the pilot was unable to maintain directional control and the aircraft crossed a drain before striking a fence and overturning. An inspection of the aircraft did not reveal any defect which could have contributed to the loss of directional control. Following the landing accident the property owner had rotary-hoed the paddock to a depth of 10 centimetres. Using a motor vehicle, the pilot compacted a 2.5 metre wide strip along the centreline of the paddock, which sloped approximately 3 degrees down to the north. At the time of the takeoff to the north the wind was from the north-east at 5 knots. The pilot selected a takeoff power setting of 53 percent of the maximum power available which effectively increased the take off ground roll required by approximately 170 metres.
Probable cause:
The investigation revealed that after a 50 metre ground roll the left main wheel entered the rotary-hoed area. The aircraft then veered further to the left before striking the fence and overturning.
The following factors were considered relevant to the development of the accident:
- The strip width was inadequate for the safe operation of the aircraft.
- The pilot did not maintain directional control during the take-off.
- The pilot delayed abandoning the take-off.
Final Report:

Crash of a Cessna 402A in Melbourne: 6 killed

Date & Time: Sep 3, 1986
Type of aircraft:
Registration:
VH-RED
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
No
Schedule:
Melbourne - Leongatha
MSN:
402A-0130
YOM:
1969
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
5
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
6
Circumstances:
The flight was intended to return patients to their home area following medical treatment in Melbourne. After an apparently normal take-off, the aircraft ceased climbing at about 100 feet above ground level. In response to a query from the Tower, the pilot advised that the left engine had failed, that he was feathering the propeller and would return for landing. The aircraft was seen to be deviating to the left, towards a large array of power lines. These lines extend from about 40 feet to 90 feet above the ground, and as the aircraft converged with the array it was probably below the height of the upper wires. The aircraft then suddenly veered to the left and subsequently struck the ground in a steep nose-down attitude. A fire broke out on impact and destroyed much of the wreckage. The final manoeuvre performed by the aircraft was typical of that which occurs when one engine of a twin-engine aircraft is producing considerably less power than the other, and airspeed is reduced to below that required to maintain directional control. The pilot had reported that the left engine had failed, and the loss of control as described by witnesses was consistent with a reduction of power from this engine, combined with low airspeed.
Probable cause:
The investigation of the accident was hampered by the extent of the fire damage. However, an extensive technical examination did not reveal any evidence of a defect or malfunction with either the engines, the various systems or the airframe which might have contributed to the accident. Although the pilot had indicated that he was feathering the left propeller, it was determined that the propeller was not feathered at the time of the accident. It was not possible to establish if the pilot had subsequently elected not to initiate feathering action, or whether such action was initiated too late for it to be completed before impact with the ground. The reason for the loss of performance reported by the pilot could not be established. It is likely that while the aircraft was being manoeuvred to avoid the power lines and return for a landing, the airspeed decayed to below the minimum required to enable adequate control of the aircraft to be maintained. At the point where control of the aircraft was lost, there was insufficient height available for the pilot to effect recovery. The reason continued flight was attempted, rather than a controlled forced landing in open areas prior to the power lines, could not be determined.
Final Report: