Canada

Prior to touchdown in a northerly direction, the aircraft encountered a gusty westerly crosswind and the associated turbulence. This initiated an un-commanded yaw and left wing drop indicating an aerodynamic stall. The pilot was unsuccessful in recovering full control of the aircraft and it impacted rising terrain on the shore approximately 30 feet above the water surface.

Failure of the right main gear for unknown reasons.

A first-stage turbine wheel blade in the left engine failed due to a combination of metallurgical issues and stator vane burn-through. As a result of the blade failure, the left engine continued to operate but experienced a near-total loss of power at approximately 500 feet above ground level, on final approach to Runway 26 at the Red Lake Airport. The crew were unable to identify the nature of the engine malfunction, which prevented them from taking timely and appropriate action to control the aircraft. The nature of the engine malfunction resulted in the left propeller being at a very low blade angle, which, together with the landing configuration of the aircraft, resulted in the aircraft being in an increasingly high drag and asymmetric state. When the aircraft’s speed reduced below minimum control speed (VMC), the crew lost control at an altitude from which a recovery was not possible.

The exact cause of the accident remains unknown.

Findings as to causes and contributing factors:
1. During approach to landing on the previous flight, the right-wing leading-edge and wing tip were damaged by impact with several trees.
2. The damage to the aircraft was not evaluated or inspected by qualified personnel prior to take-off.
3. Cumulative unmanaged stressors disrupted the pilot’s processing of safety-critical information, and likely contributed to an unsafe decision to depart with a damaged, uninspected aircraft.
4. The aircraft was operated in a damaged condition and departed controlled flight likely due to interference between parts of the failing wing tip, acting under air loads, and the right aileron.
Findings as to risk:
Not applicable.
Other findings:
1. The emergency locator transmitter did not activate, due to crash damage and submersion in water.
2. The aircraft was not fitted with FM radio equipment that is usually carried by aircraft servicing the lodge. Lodge personnel did not have a means to contact the pilot once the aircraft moved away from the dock.

Findings as to causes and contributing factors:
1. An accurate take-off weight and balance calculation was not completed prior to departure, resulting in an aircraft weight that exceeded its maximum certified takeoff weight.
2. The right engine number 1 cylinder failed during the take-off sequence due to a preexisting fatigue crack, resulting in an engine fire.
3. After the right propeller’s feathering mechanism was activated, the propeller never achieved a fully feathered condition likely due to a seized bearing in the feathering pump.
4. The windmilling right propeller caused an increase in drag which, combined with the overweight condition, contributed to the aircraft’s inability to maintain altitude, and the aircraft collided with terrain short of the runway.
5. The operator’s safety management system was ineffective at identifying and correcting unsafe operating practices.
6. Transport Canada’s surveillance activities did not identify the operator’s unsafe operating practices related to weight and balance and net take-off flight path calculations. Consequently, these unsafe practices persisted.
Findings as to risk:
1. If companies do not adhere to operational procedures in their operations manual, there is a risk that the safety of flight cannot be assured.
2. If Transport Canada does not adopt a balanced approach that combines inspections for compliance with audits of safety management processes, unsafe operating practices may not be identified, thereby increasing the risk of accidents.
3. If cockpit or data recordings are not available to an investigation, this may preclude the identification and communication of safety deficiencies to advance transportation safety.
Other findings:
1. Current Canadian Aviation Regulations permit a transport category piston-powered aircraft to carry passengers without a flight data recorder or cockpit voice recorder.
2. The crew resource management component of the flight attendant’s training had not been completed.

Findings as to causes and contributing factors:
1. The pilot flew just above the tree tops into instrument meteorological conditions and rising terrain, and the aircraft struck a tree that was significantly taller than the others.
2. The pilot and 1 passenger did not exit the aircraft before it was consumed in the postimpact fire.
3. Air Nootka did not have effective methods to monitor its pilots’ in-flight decision making and associated practices. As a result, Air Nootka had no way to detect and correct unsafe behavior or poor decision making such as occurred on this flight.
Findings as to risk:
1. If aircraft are not fitted with technology to reduce fuel leakage or to eliminate ignition sources, the risk of post-impact fire is increased.
2. If aircraft are not equipped with shoulder harnesses for all seating positions then there is an increased risk of injuries.
3. If aircraft are not equipped with some alternate means of escape such as push-out windows, then there is a risk that post-crash structural deformation will jam doors shut and restrict exit for the occupants.
4. If companies operating under self-dispatch do not monitor their operations, they risk not being able to identify unsafe practices that are a hazard to flight crew and passengers.
5. If flight data recordings are not available to an investigation, this may preclude the identification and communication of safety deficiencies to advance transportation safety.

Findings as to causes and contributing factors:
- It is likely that the PROBES AUTO/MANUAL switch was inadvertently moved from the AUTO to the MANUAL selection when the centre pedestal cover was removed.
- The PROBES AUTO/MANUAL switch position check was not included on the Newfoundland and Labrador Government Air Services CL-415 checklist.
- The flight crew was occupied with other flight activities during the scooping run and did not notice that the water quantity exceeded the predetermined limit until after the tanks had filled to capacity.
- The flight crew decided to continue the take-off with the aircraft in an overweight condition.
- The extended period with the probes deployed on the water resulted in a longer take-off run, and the pilot flying decided to alter the departure path to the left.
- The left float contacted the surface of the lake during initiation of the left turn. Aircraft control was lost and resulted in collision with the water.
Findings as to risk:
- If safety equipment is installed in a manner that hampers its access and removal, then there is an increased risk that occupants may not be able to retrieve the safety equipment in a timely manner to ensure their survival.
- If individuals are not trained on safety equipment installed on the aircraft, then there is an increased risk that the individuals may not be aware of how to effectively use the equipment.
- If a checklist does not include a critical item, and flight crews are expected to rely on their memory, then there is a risk that that item will be missed, which could jeopardize the safety of flight.
- If flight crews do not adhere to standard operating procedures, then there is a risk that errors and omissions can be introduced, which could jeopardize the safety of flight.
- If a person is not restrained during flight and the aircraft either makes an abrupt manoeuvre or loses control, then that person is at a much greater risk of injury or death.
- If an overweight take-off is carried out, there may be an adverse effect on the aircraft’s performance, which could jeopardize the safety of flight.
- If companies do not have procedures for recording overweight take-offs and flight crews do not report them, then the overall condition of the aircraft’s structures will not be accurately known, which could jeopardize the safety of flight.
- If organizations do not use formal and documented processes to manage operational risks, there is an increased risk that hazards will not be identified and mitigated.
- If organizations do not have measures in place to raise awareness of the potential impact of stress on performance or to promote the early recognition and mitigation of stress, then there is an increased risk that errors will occur when an individual is affected by stress that has become chronic.
Other findings:
- Utilizing the locking position of the PROBES AUTO/MANUAL switch for the MANUAL selection allows the switch to be inadvertently moved from the AUTO to the MANUAL position.