Country
Operator Image

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24A-954 near Rotorua: 1 killed

Date & Time: Dec 8, 2012 at 1315 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-EMX
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
No
MSN:
278
YOM:
1981
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
1
Captain / Total flying hours:
430
Captain / Total hours on type:
95.00
Aircraft flight hours:
11300
Circumstances:
The pilot, who was undertaking training toward a Grade 2 Agricultural Pilot Rating, began work at approximately 0625 hours on the day of the accident. The pilot and his instructor, who was in another topdressing aircraft, flew to a block of land to the south east of Rotorua where the pilot completed 15 sowing runs, while his instructor worked in the local vicinity in the second aircraft. The pilot and instructor completed the work on this block, had a break and then transited to the Waikite Valley, arriving at approximately 0945 hours. At 1045 hours, after refuelling his aircraft, the pilot commenced sowing a ‘special mix’ fertiliser, in an alternating pattern between the instructor and pilot, with two aircraft operating from the airstrip. The alternating pattern allowed the instructor to observe and supervise the pilot during the take off and landing phases, while allowing the operation to proceed efficiently. The pilot and instructor stopped for lunch after an hour of flying, refuelled once more and then continued with their work. The amount of fertiliser that was loaded into the pilot’s aircraft was progressively increased as the work proceeded. The initial load of product was 900 kg, gradually increasing by 50 kg increments, when the instructor was satisfied that the pilot’s performance allowed this increase. The last five loads carried prior to the accident were each 1100 kg. Nothing untoward was noticed during the sowing runs, apart from the pilot aborting one landing attempt, due to the wake turbulence from the instructor’s aircraft during take off. At the time of the accident the pilot was performing ‘clearing runs’, sowing on remaining areas of land not already covered by previous sowing runs. Immediately prior to the accident, the pilot called the instructor on the radio to enquire of his location. The instructor responded with “directly behind you on the other side of the woolshed”. A few seconds later, as the instructor approached to land at the airstrip, he observed the pilot’s aircraft flying in a westerly direction at approximately 400 ft AGL. He then saw the pilot’s aircraft make a slight turn to the left. Describing what he had seen as: “he started to climb and turn slightly to the left, then the plane was in a left hand spin”. The instructor thought at the time that the aircraft spun for one and a half rotations to the left, prior to being obscured by the ridge adjacent to the airstrip. The accident occurred in daylight, at approximately 1315 hours, at Waikite Valley, Rotorua, at an elevation of 1460 ft. Latitude S 38° 18.5', longitude E 176° 17.42'.
Probable cause:
Conclusions
- The pilot was appropriately licensed and held a valid medical certificate.
- The aircraft had been appropriately maintained and no technical discrepancy was discovered that could have contributed to the accident.
- It is likely that, during a climbing turn, the pilot inadvertently allowed an aerodynamic stall to occur at which point the aircraft suddenly departed controlled flight.
- No emergency jettison of the hopper contents was attempted.
- The height above the ground, was insufficient for the pilot to perform a successful recovery once the departure from controlled flight had fully developed.
- The pilot’s lack of experience with agricultural operations and relative unfamiliarity with the aircraft type could not be eliminated as having a bearing on the accident.
Final Report:

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24-954 in Raglan

Date & Time: Jan 31, 2008 at 0630 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-JNX
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
Yes
MSN:
275
YOM:
1980
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
Shortly after takeoff from a remote terrain located in Te Uku, near Raglan, the pilot lost control of the aircraft that collided with a fence and crashed, bursting into flames. The pilot escaped uninjured while the aircraft was destroyed by fire.

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24-950EX in Opotiki: 1 killed

Date & Time: Nov 10, 2007 at 1320 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-EGV
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
No
Site:
MSN:
244
YOM:
1977
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
1
Captain / Total flying hours:
5243
Captain / Total hours on type:
4889.00
Circumstances:
On the afternoon of Friday 9 November 2007, the pilot of ZK-EGV, a specialised agricultural aeroplane powered by a turbine engine, began a task to sow 80 tonnes of superphosphate over a farm situated in low hills 5 km south of Opotiki township and 4 km from the Opotiki aerodrome. The pilot was familiar with the farm’s airstrip where he loaded the product, and with the farm. After 6 or 7 loads, the wind was too strong for top-dressing, so the pilot and loader-driver flew back to their base at the Whakatane aerodrome, about 40 km away. At Whakatane, the aeroplane’s fuel tanks were filled. Later that day, the pilot replaced the display for the aeroplane’s precision sowing guidance system, which had a software fault. The next morning, 10 November 2007, the pilot bicycled about 6 km from his house to the Whakatane aerodrome. The loader-driver said that the pilot looked “pretty tired” from the effort when he arrived at the aerodrome at about 0545. After the aeroplane had been started using its internal batteries, the pilot and loader-driver flew to complete a task at a farm west of Whakatane. The pilot’s notebook recorded that he began the task at 0610 and took 45 loads to spread the remaining 68 tonnes of product, an average load of 1511 kilograms (kg). The loader-driver said that the pilot had determined about 2 months earlier that the scales on the loader used at that airstrip were “weighing light” by about 200 kg, so the loader-driver allowed for that difference. After that task, the pilot and loader-driver flew back to the farm south of Opotiki where they had been the previous afternoon. A different loader at that airstrip had accurate scales, and the loader-driver said that he loaded 1500 kg each time, as requested by the pilot. The fertiliser that remained in the farm airstrip storage bin after the accident was found to be dry and free flowing. The sowing task at this farm began at 1010 and the pilot stopped after every hour to uplift 180 litres (L) of fuel, which weighed 144 kg. During the last refuel stop, between 1226 and 1245, he had a snack and a drink. Sowing recommenced at 1245 with about 3 minutes between each load, the last load being put on at about 1316. The loader-driver said the wind at the airstrip was light and the pilot did not report any problem with the aeroplane. After the last refuel, the top-dressing had been mostly out of sight of the loader-driver. When the aeroplane did not return when expected for the next load, the loader driver tried 3 or 4 times to call the cellphone installed in the aeroplane. This was unsuccessful, so at 1338 he followed the operator’s emergency procedure and called 111 to report that the aeroplane was overdue. Telephone records showed that on 10 November 2007 the aeroplane cellphone had been connected for a total of more than 90 minutes on 14 voice calls, and had been used to send or receive 10 text messages. Correlation of the call times with the job details recorded by the pilot suggested he sent most of his messages while the aeroplane was on the ground. Nearly all of the calls and messages involved a female work colleague who was a friend. The pilot initiated most calls by sending a message, but each time that the signal was lost during a call, the friend would stop the call and immediately re-dial the aeroplane phone; so, in some cases, consecutive connections were parts of one long conversation. The longest session exceeded 35 minutes. The nature of the calls could not be determined, but the friend claimed the content of the last phone call was not acrimonious or likely to have agitated the pilot. The friend advised that the pilot had said he often made the phone calls to help himself stay alert. At 1153, in a phone call to his home, the pilot indicated that the job was going well and he might be home by about 1400. In one call to the friend, the pilot said that he was a bit tired and that he hoped the wind would increase enough that afternoon to force him to cancel the next job. At 1308:45, the friend called the aeroplane phone and talked with the pilot until the call was disconnected at 1320:14. The friend said that while the pilot had been talking, the volume of his voice decreased slightly then there was a “static” sound. Apart from the reduced volume, the pilot’s voice had sounded normal and he had not suggested anything untoward regarding the job or the aeroplane. The friend immediately called back, but got the answerphone message from the aeroplane phone. Two further attempts to contact the pilot were unsuccessful, but the friend did not consider that anything untoward might have happened. An orchardist who was working approximately 3 km from the farm being top-dressed had heard an aeroplane flying nearby for some hours before he heard a loud sound that led him to fear that there had been an accident. He noted that the time was 1320 and immediately began to search the surrounding area. After the loader-driver’s emergency call, the Police organised an aerial search, which found the wreckage of the aeroplane at 1435 on the edge of a grove of native trees, approximately 600 metres (m) northwest of the area being top-dressed. The pilot had been killed. His body was not removed until 26 hours after the accident, because of a Police concern not to disturb the wreckage until aviation accident investigators were present. The CAA began an investigation that day into the accident and the Commission sent an investigator to help determine whether there were any similarities with another Fletcher accident that the Commission was then investigating. On 19 November 2007, because of potential issues that concerned regulatory oversight, the Commission started its own inquiry.
Probable cause:
Findings are listed in order of development and not in order of priority.
- The reason for the aeroplane colliding with trees was not conclusively determined. However, the pilot was affected by a number of fatigue-inducing factors, none of which should have been significant on its own. The combination of these factors and the added distractions of a prolonged cell phone call and a minor equipment failure were considered likely to have diverted the pilot’s attention from his primary task of monitoring the aeroplane’s flight path.
- Although pilot incapacitation could not be ruled out entirely, it was considered that the pilot’s state of health had not directly contributed to the accident.
- The potential distraction of cellphones during critical phases of flight under VFR was not specifically addressed by CARs.
- Apart from the probable failure of the GPS sowing guidance equipment, no evidence was found to suggest that the aeroplane was unserviceable at the time of the accident, but its airworthiness certificate was invalid because there was no record that the mandatory post-flight checks of the vertical tail fin had been completed in the previous 3 days.
- The installation of a powerful turbine engine without an effective means of de-rating the power created the potential for excessive power demands and possible structural overload, but this was not considered to have contributed to the accident.
- The pilot was an experienced agricultural pilot in current practice. Although he had met the operator’s continued competency requirements, the operator’s method of conducting his last 2 competency checks was likely to have made them invalid in terms of the CAR requirements.
- Although the aeroplane was grossly overloaded and the hopper load exceeded the structural limit on the take-off prior to the accident, neither exceedance contributed to the accident, and the aeroplane was not overloaded at the time of the accident.
- The emergency locator transmitter did not radiate a useful signal because of damage to the antenna socket on the unit. The installation was also not in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions or the recommended practice.
Final Report:

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24-950 in Whangarei: 2 killed

Date & Time: Nov 22, 2005 at 1142 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-DZG
Flight Type:
Survivors:
No
MSN:
207
YOM:
1975
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
2
Captain / Total flying hours:
16000
Captain / Total hours on type:
2382.00
Aircraft flight hours:
10597
Circumstances:
On 21 November 2005, the day before the accident, the pilot had completed a day of aerial topdressing in ZK-DZG, a New Zealand Aerospace Industries Fletcher FU24-950, then flown the aircraft with his loader-driver as a passenger to Whangarei Aerodrome. That evening the pilot contacted his operator’s (the company’s) chief engineer in Hamilton and said that the airspeed indicator in ZK-DZG was stuck on 80 knots. The chief engineer told him the pitot-static line for the indicator was probably blocked and to have a local aircraft engineer blow out the line. Early the next morning, the day of the accident, the pilot flew ZK-DZG with his loader-driver on board to an airstrip 50 km north-west of Whangarei to spread fertiliser on a farm property. As the morning progressed, the weather conditions became unsuitable for aerial topdressing. At about 1020, the pilot used his mobile telephone to talk to another company pilot at Kerikeri, and told him that the wind was too strong for further work. The conversation included general work-related issues and ended about 1045, with the pilot saying that he was shortly going to return to Whangarei and go to his motel. Before leaving for Whangarei, the pilot spoke with a truck driver who had delivered fertiliser to the airstrip about 1100. The driver commented later that the pilot said the wind had picked up enough to preclude further topdressing. After they had covered the fertiliser, the pilot told the driver that he and the loader-driver would fly to Whangarei. The driver did not recall anything untoward, except that the pilot had casually mentioned there was some electrical fault causing an amber light in the cockpit to flicker and that it would only be a problem if a second light came on. He said the pilot did not appear to be concerned about the light. The driver then left and did not see the aircraft depart. The pilot used his mobile telephone to tell an aircraft engineer at Whangarei Aerodrome about the airspeed indicator problem and asked him if he could have a look at it and blow out the pitot-static system. The engineer believed the call was made from the ground at about 1130, but he could not be certain of the time. The engineer agreed to rectify the problem and the pilot said he would arrive at the Aerodrome about noon. The engineer said he did not know that the pilot had spent the previous night in Whangarei or that the aircraft had been parked at the Aerodrome overnight. ZK-DZG was equipped with a global positioning system (GPS) and its navigation data was downloaded for analysis. From the data it was established that the aircraft departed from the airstrip at 1131 and flew for about 39 km on a track slightly right of the direct track to Whangarei Aerodrome, before altering heading direct to the aerodrome and Pukenui Forest located 5 km west of Whangarei city. A witness who had some aeroplane pilot flying experience, and was on a property close to the track of ZK-DZG, said he saw the aircraft fly past shortly after about 1130 at an estimated height of 500 feet. He watched it fly in the direction of Pukenui Forest for about 40 seconds before turning his head away. A short time later he turned again to look at the aircraft, which by then was just above the horizon about 2 ridges away. He said there was a strong, constant wind blowing from the right (south) of the aircraft, which appeared to be drifting sideways and rocking its wings. He then saw the aircraft enter a steep descending turn that seemed to tighten before it disappeared from view. He estimated it to have turned about 270 degrees. Another witness near the aircraft track and accident site reported seeing the aircraft at about 1140 flying just above the tree line and thought it might have been “dusting” the forest. The aircraft then turned and disappeared behind some trees. Other witnesses who heard or saw the aircraft described the weather as squally throughout the morning with strong winds from the south, and said that near the time of the accident there was no rain. The witnesses noticed nothing untoward with the aircraft itself, and at the time none was concerned that the aircraft may have been involved in an accident. The local aircraft engineer said he was not concerned when ZK-DZG did not arrive at Whangarei, because from his experience it was not unusual for agricultural pilots to change their plans at the last minute and to not inform the engineers. He described his conversation with the pilot as being casual and said the pilot did not mention that he was finishing topdressing for the day because of the weather. He thought the pilot was just trying to fit in the maintenance work and that his plans had changed. The pilot had not asked him to provide any search and rescue watch, nor did the engineer expect him to because he could not recall any pilot having asked him to do so. There was no evidence that the pilot made any radio calls during the flight. The frequency to which the radio was selected and its serviceability could not be determined because of the accident damage. At about 2200 a member of the pilot’s family contacted the emergency services when she became concerned that there had been no contact from the pilot. An extensive aerial search began at first light the next morning, and at about 1120 the wreckage of ZK-DZG was located about 50 metres (m) below a ridge in a heavily wooded area of Pukenui Forest, at an elevation of 920 feet above sea level. Both occupants were fatally injured.
Probable cause:
Findings are listed in order of development and not in order of priority.
- The pilot was correctly licensed, experienced and authorised for the flight.
- The pilot was operating the aircraft in an unserviceable condition because of a stuck airspeed indicator, which prevented him accurately assessing the aircraft airspeed. Consequently the
aircraft could have exceeded its airspeed limitations by some degree in the turbulent conditions.
- The structural integrity of the vertical fin had been reduced to such an extent by a cluster of unnoticed pre-existing fatigue cracks in its leading edge that eventual failure was inevitable. When the fin failed, it brought about an unrecoverable loss of control and the accident.
- Although the early design of the vertical fin met recognised requirements, it did not provide for any structural redundancy and the leading edge of the fin (a structural component) was not
damage-tolerant.
- The cracks in the fin leading edge went unnoticed until the failure, most likely because an approved black rubber anti-abrasion strip along that surface had prevented any detailed examination of it.
- The approved maintenance programmes did not reflect the inspection-dependent nature of the vertical fin for its ongoing airworthiness, with the inspection periods having been extended over
the years without full consideration given to the importance of frequent inspections for timely detection of fatigue damage.
- There was no evidence that the fitment of a more powerful STC-approved turbine engine, in place of a piston engine, had initiated the fatigue cracks in the fin leading edge. However, once
started, the extra engine power might have contributed to the rate of propagation of the cracks.
- The vertical fin defects and failures in the Fletcher aircraft over the years were not confined to turbine-powered aircraft.
- The CAA’s STC approval process for the turbine engine installation was generally robust and had followed recognised procedures, but the process should have been enhanced by an in-depth
evaluation of the fatigue effects on the empennage.
- Given the generally harsh operating environment and frequency of operations for the turbine powered Fletcher, the continued airworthiness requirements of the fin were not scrutinised as
robustly as they should have been during the STC approval process. Consequently the maintenance programmes had not been improved to ensure the ongoing structural integrity of the fin.
Final Report:

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24-950M in Mairoa: 1 killed

Date & Time: Dec 19, 2003 at 1500 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-BXZ
Flight Phase:
Survivors:
No
MSN:
65
YOM:
1960
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
0
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
1
Captain / Total flying hours:
14335
Captain / Total hours on type:
5000.00
Circumstances:
On the morning of 19 December 2003, the pilot began work about 0630 hours, flying from Te Kuiti aerodrome to an agricultural airstrip about eight nautical miles to the west. At that strip he completed a 150 tonne lime contract that had been started by two other aircraft the day before. Refuelling of the aircraft was completed approximately every hour, and the pilot stopped for a break with about four loads remaining. At 1400 hours, with the job completed, he flew to the strip from which he operated until the time of the accident. On arrival at this strip, the pilot completed a reconnaissance flight with the pilot of ZK-EMW, discussed their sowing plan, and agreed on a 1.1 tonne load with the loader driver. Take-offs were made to the south-west, landings in the opposite direction. The loader driver reported that the job was going smoothly, and that the pilot seemed in good spirits, at one stage miming wiping his brow, which the loader driver took to be a comment on the heat of the day. During this time, a third company aircraft, ZK-JAL, arrived at the strip and shut down, as the loader driver was able to handle only two aircraft at a time. The pilot of ZK-JAL flew a briefing sortie with the pilot of ZK-BXZ prior to the planned departure of ZK-BXZ. After each take-off, ZK-BXZ would turn left on to a downwind leg and then cross over the top (loading) end of the strip on the way to the sowing area. ZK-BXZ was working inward from the eastern boundary of the property, and ZK-EMW from the western boundary. While topdressing was in progress, fresh lime was being trucked to the strip and placed in the large fertilizer bin from which the loader was replenishing the aircraft. The lime was received directly from the processing plant, and was dry and free-flowing. As each load arrived, the farmer would mix a cobalt supplement with it in the bin. One of the truck drivers, who himself held a Commercial Pilot Licence (Aeroplane), took several photographs of the aircraft landing and taking off. One photograph showed ZK-BXZ leaving the end of the strip on probably its penultimate take-off, with ZK-EMW on final approach on the reciprocal heading. On this occasion ZK-EMW passed over ZK-BXZ just after the latter became airborne. The next photograph showed ZK-BXZ approximately two thirds of the way down the strip, with 20° of flap set on its final take-off, with dirt being thrown up by the wheels as it hit the soft spots in the strip. The driver did not watch the take-off beyond this point. The pilot of ZK-EMW initially reported that on his landing approach, he flew over ZK-BXZ while it was still on its take-off run. He later disputed this and claimed that ZK-BXZ had just become airborne when it disappeared from view under his right wing. In any event, ZK-BXZ only flew approximately 170 metres, so the proximity of these two aircraft was very close if ZK-BXZ was already airborne at this point in time. The close proximity of the two aircraft is significant as it is possible that ZKBXZ, being the lower of the two aircraft, may have encountered wake turbulence from ZK-EMW. All aircraft produce wake turbulence as a by-product of generating lift from their wings, the intensity varying with the aircraft’s speed, weight and configuration. The weather conditions, as discussed in the article appended to this report, were favourable for ZK-BXZ to encounter the wake vortices from the aircraft passing above. The first indication of the accident was a loud bang heard by the farmer – he was in the bin mixing in the cobalt supplement, and initially thought he had heard a truck tailgate slamming. Looking towards the end of the strip, he saw a plume of smoke and immediately went by motorcycle to investigate. On arrival at the scene, he found the aeroplane well ablaze, and was unable to get close because of the heat. As the accident occurred, a fourth company aircraft, ZK-EGV, arrived at the strip. The pilot did not see the actual impact, but flew over the burning wreckage on approach. As soon as he landed he went by foot to the accident site, as he had arrived too late to join those that had gone on board the loading vehicle. The loader driver used his fire extinguisher to quell the flames, but could do nothing to assist the pilot. After the extinguisher ran out, the fire flared up again, and all those present could do was to await the arrival of the Fire Service. The accident occurred in daylight, at approximately 1500 hours NZDT, at Mairoa, 10 nm south-west of Te Kuiti aerodrome, at an elevation of 1150 ft. Latitude: S 38° 22.9', longitude: E 174° 57.0'; grid reference: 260-R16-806117.
Probable cause:
Conclusions:
- The pilot was properly licensed, rated, and fit for the flight undertaken.
- The aircraft had been subjected to regular maintenance and appeared to be airworthy prior to the accident.
- The engine strip found no reason why the engine would not be producing full power.
- The aircraft was operating to the limits of its performance for the given conditions.
- The accident was not survivable.
- It has not been possible to determine a conclusive cause for the accident.
Final Report:

Crash of a Fletcher FU-24-950M near Matawai

Date & Time: Sep 20, 2003 at 1015 LT
Type of aircraft:
Operator:
Registration:
ZK-BDS
Flight Phase:
Flight Type:
Survivors:
Yes
Site:
Schedule:
Motu - Opotiki
MSN:
001
YOM:
1954
Country:
Region:
Crew on board:
1
Crew fatalities:
Pax on board:
1
Pax fatalities:
Other fatalities:
Total fatalities:
0
Circumstances:
Crashed during bad weather. Andrew Wilde was flying and George Muir was a passenger. While enroute from Motu - Opotiki the gully became un-negotiable, so Andrew decided to return to Motu by flying a reciprocal course low level, depicted by arrows on his hand held marine GPS. During the return trip to Motahora up the Otara river valley, he found that the cloud base had lowered even further than when he entered the valley 6 minutes prior & he became fully reliant on that little GPS. The GPS became our enemy & lured Andrew into the cloud base, which ended our flight abruptly.
Testimony from George Muir, loader driver and passenger during this flight.