India

The four engine aircraft departed Agra-Kheria Airport at 1000LT on a combined exercice with a second C-130, carrying five crew members. The goal of the mission was to simulate drops at low altitude. At a height of about 300 feet, the aircraft encountered wake turbulences from the preceding airplane. It is believed that the crew attempted to gain height when control was lost. The aircraft crashed in the rocky bed of a river near Karauli. The aircraft was destroyed and all five occupants were killed. Built in 2010 and delivered to IAF in April 2011, the aircraft was one of the six examples ordered by IAF.

On 25.03.2014, the operator received the travel programme for 27.3.2014, of Hon'ble Governor of Haryana from Chandigarh to Delhi. On 26.3.2014, the operations department took the flight clearances and filed the passenger manifest with the ATC and other concerned agencies. The flight plan was filed by a CPL holder, who is working as flight dispatcher with the Government of Haryana. The departure on 27.3.2014 was fixed at 1130 hrs. The cockpit crew reported at 1045 hrs for the flight. Pre flight medical examination including the breath analyzer test was carried out at 1100 hrs. The breath analyzer test for both the cockpit crew members was negative. Pre flight briefing among the crew members was carried out by using the documents prepared by the flight dispatcher. The aircraft was taxied under its own power from Haryana Government Hangar to bay no. D-2 in front of ATC building. No abnormality was observed or reported on the aircraft during this taxiing. The engines were shut down for passenger embarkation. As per the passenger manifest, in addition to the pilot and co-pilot there were 8 passengers. The baggage on board was approx. 50 lbs. There was 2100 lbs. of fuel on board. After boarding of the passengers, the aircraft engines were started at 1130 hrs. The aircraft was cleared for departure abeam „D‟ link. The aircraft was taxied out via taxiway „D‟. After ATC departure clearance the aircraft was lined up for take-off. On clearance from ATC the take off roll was initiated and all the parameters were found normal. As per the pilot just before getting airborne some stiffness was found in rudder control as is felt in yaw damper engagement. The aircraft then pulled slightly to the left which as per the Commander was controllable. As per the pilot, the rotation was initiated at 98 knots. As per the DATCO the aircraft had lifted up to 10-15 feet AGL. The Commander has stated that after lift-off, immediately the left rudder got locked in forward position resulting in the aircraft yawing and rolling to left. The pilots tried to control it with right bank but the aircraft could not be controlled. Within 3-4 seconds of getting airborne the aircraft impacted the ground in left bank attitude. The initial impact was on pucca (tar road) and the wing has taken the first impact loads with lower surface metallic surface rubbing and screeching on ground. After the aircraft came to final halt, the co-pilot opened the door and evacuation was carried out. There was no injury to any of the occupants. The engine conditions lever could not be brought back as these were stuck. The throttle and pitch levers were retarded. The fuel shut off valves were closed. Battery and avionics were put off. Friction lock nuts were found loose. As per the Commander, after ensuring safety of passengers he had gone to cockpit to confirm that all switches were „off‟. At that time he has loosened the friction lock nuts to bring back the condition lever and throttle lever. However even after loosening the nut it was not possible to bring back these levers. Fire fighting vehicles were activated by pressing crash bell and primary alarm. Hand held RT set was used to announce the crash. RCFF vehicles proceeded to the site via runway and reported all the 10 personnel are safe and out of the disabled aircraft. Water and complementary agents (foam and dry chemical powder) were used. After fire was extinguished, the Fire Fighting vehicles reported back at crash bay except one CFT which was held at crash site under instruction of COO. The aircraft was substantially damaged. There was no fire barring burning of small patch of grass due coming in contact with the hot surfaces and oil. There was no injury to any of the occupants. The accident occurred in day light conditions.

On 05.01.2014, Air India Ltd. Airbus A-320-231 aircraft was scheduled to operate flight AI-889 (Delhi – Guwahati – Imphal) and return flight, AI-890 (Imphal – Guwahati – Delhi). Air India dispatch section at Delhi, which has received the roster of flight crew for the flights, had prepared the operational and ATC flight plans by using FWz flight planning software and taking into account the weight & weather (forecast winds). Same set of flight crew and cabin crew was rostered to operate the four sectors mentioned above. The flight was under Command of an ATPL holder with another ATPL holder as First Officer (FO) and 04 Cabin Crew members. The Commander was CAT III qualified and the FO was CAT I qualified. The FWz plan was prepared for VT-ESL, but later on the aircraft was changed to VT-ESH. As per the pilot in command as both the aircraft have bogie gear type of landing gear and the performance factor is also same for these aircraft, he had accepted the FWz plan of VT-ESL. As per the manager flight dispatch on duty, only first leg i.e. Delhi Guwahati was dispatched. Required fuel figures were informed to the engineering & commercial departments. Pilots were briefed with folders which in addition to flight plans contained current NOTAMs and meteorological information. The relevant information in these documents was highlighted for briefing to the flight crew. For the remaining sectors which were self briefing sectors flight plan and NOTAMs were given to the flight crew. As per the pre flight briefing register, both the crew members have visited the flight dispatch section for briefing and at around 10:40 hrs. IST have signed the dispatch register. The sectors Delhi – Guwahati – Imphal – Guwahati were as per schedule and were uneventful. As per the flight sector report, the transit time at Guwahati prior to Guwahati-Delhi sector was 50 minutes. The aircraft landed at Guwahati from Imphal at 11:15 hrs. UTC and 12.7 tons of fuel was uplifted. The filed alternates for the sector were Lucknow and Jaipur in that order. METARs of Delhi, Lucknow and Jaipur were provided at Guwahati. There was no specific briefing. Flight crew has taken the weather updates of destination and alternates before departure from Guwahati. Lucknow visibility at that time was 2000 meters with temperature and dew point of 18°C & 13°C respectively. The weather at Delhi (11:05 UTC) was RVR as 500 meters for runway 29, general visibility of 150 meters, with both temperature and dew point of 12°C. A speci was issued at 1130 UTC for Jaipur with winds 04 kts. visibility 3000m and haze. There was no significant clouding (NSC), temperature (T) 18°C & dew point (Dp) 13°C, QNH 1013. Pre flight walk around inspection was carried out by the crew at Guwahati and the aircraft was released by an Aircraft Maintenance Engineer which was accepted by the Pilot-in-command. There was no snag or technical problem with the aircraft. There was no component or system released under Minimum Equipment List (MEL). For its last leg, the aircraft departed Guwahati for Delhi at 1205 UTC with 173 passengers on board. The fuel requirement from Guwahati to Delhi with 179 persons on board was 12.2 tonnes. As per the commander of flight, additional 500 kgs of fuel was taken (total on board was 12.7 tonnes) considering the time of arrival in Delhi was that of traffic congestion and because of weather in Delhi. As per the Operational Flight Plan (OFP), there was 10 minutes of arrival delay at the destination. The aircraft was flown on managed speeds. Initially the flight was cleared by ATC for a lower level and was later on cleared to fly at cruising level of 340. The fuel was checked visually on the Flight Management System (FMS) and Fuel Page which was further cross checked with the OFP planned figures by the crew on way points but was not recorded on the Operational Flight Plan. As per the crew, the fuel consumed was marginally higher than planned. The time taken to reach the way points was also noted, which was almost the same as planned figures were. Enroute, there was no briefing about traffic congestion over Delhi by any of the ground stations of AAI. The crew, on reaching overhead Lucknow, has taken Lucknow weather and when the aircraft was in range of ATIS Delhi, Delhi ATIS weather was also copied. The aircraft was not equipped with Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) but was provided with HF/VHF system. As per the flight crew no flight following was provided either by flight dispatch or the IOCC of Air India. Weather updates were not seeked by the crew from the flight dispatch nor were any updates provided by Flight dispatch to the aircraft during the flight except when crew had asked Delhi dispatch about Jaipur visibility before finally making the decision to divert to Jaipur. Flight crew did not seek any update of Delhi or Jaipur weather till the time the aircraft came in contact with Delhi ATC. While in contact with Delhi ATC, the flight was advised to join hold as Delhi visibility Runway 28 RVR had dropped to the lower end of CAT I operations at this point runway 29 was below minima. AI 890 was number 12 in sequence and continued to remain in the holding pattern for the next 20-25 minutes. During this period there was no attempt on the part of flight crew to seek Lucknow weather. Air India Flight dispatch has also not given any advice to the flight about Jaipur or Lucknow weather. The weather (visibility / RVR) reported on Runway 29 was below CAT I conditions so runway was not available for this flight at that moment as the First Officer was only Cat I qualified. As per commander of the flight, they did 03 holds each of 1.5 minutes leg and flew headings 360° and 180° before intercepting the localizer Runway 28 at 35 miles. RVR runway 28 also dropped below Cat. I minimas, therefore the crew discontinued approach and climbed to 8000 feet on runway heading before going on heading 180. As per the Commander, though the 1st planned diversion alternate was Lucknow which had visibility of 2000 m i.e. above minima, but change of diversion to Jaipur was made as after missed approach they were closer to Jaipur and they had inquired about the visibility from Dispatch for Jaipur, which was provided as 2000 m. At this stage the crew did not check complete weather of Jaipur. Minimum diversion fuel to Jaipur was 2.9 tonnes as per FWz CFP. AI-890 commenced diversion to Jaipur with ―Fuel on Board‖ of 3.1 tonnes. As per the Station Manager of Air India at Jaipur Airport, he received a call from their Executive Director, Northern Region at around 2040 hrs. IST on 05.01.2014 that due to Delhi weather, AI 890 had diverted to Jaipur. He then conveyed the same to the airport office and the concerned engineer. The aircraft came in contact with Jaipur for the first time when it was at 68 DME from Jaipur. At that time the crew came to know of the complete weather of Jaipur from ATIS as visibility of 900 m, Dew Point as 13°C, temperature as 13°C, and RVR of 1000m. At 60 miles and passing flight level 138, the crew intimated Jaipur that the aircraft is descending for flight level 100 as cleared by Delhi control, which was acknowledged by Jaipur ATC. The aircraft again informed Jaipur ATC its position at 55 miles, 50 miles and 42 miles from Jaipur which were also acknowledged by Jaipur ATC. During these contacts, weather of Jaipur was neither asked by the crew nor provided by the ATC. When the aircraft was at flight level 83, the crew asked ATC Jaipur to confirm that they can carry out ILS approach for runway 27 via 10 DME arc. While confirming the requested approach, Jaipur ATC has informed all the stations about the weather at that moment as visibility 400 m and RVR 1000 m. When the aircraft was at 30 miles from Jaipur, Jaipur ATC passed weather as visibility 400 m, RVR 1000 m and trend visibility becoming 350 m. The crew was asked to come overhead by Jaipur ATC. At 28 DME from Jaipur, the aircraft was maintaining 6000 feet and on request was cleared by Jaipur ATC to descend to 5000 feet. When the aircraft was at 25 DME, from Jaipur, ATC advised that the weather was deteriorating rapidly and visibility was 400 meters. The crew however intimated the ATC that they were committed to land at Jaipur due fuel. As per the crew the fuel on board at that point of time was 2.6 tonnes (approx.) and approach was commenced for Jaipur with a visibility of 500 m with trend reducing. The aircraft was no. 2 in approach at Jaipur and was cleared for VORDME arc ILS approach runway 27 at 25 nm. Crew had, as per them, checked Ahmedabad distance as 291 nm, with a fuel calculation of 2.7 tonnes and as sufficient fuel was not available for Ahmedabad so did not consider diverting to Ahmedabad at that moment. Crew has also stated that Udaipur watch hours were not available with them, Jodhpur is an Air Force field with restrictions and Delhi was packed so they continued approach to Jaipur knowing that visibility / RVR was rapidly deteriorating. Due to reducing visibility, Jaipur ATC asked all the aircraft inbound for Jaipur to come over head and join JJP hold. The crew of the subject flight asked for the weather which was provided as visibility 400 m & RVR 1000 m though RVR deteriorating to 550 m. The flight from the ―Arrival Route‖ flew the VORDME arc for ILS runway 27. The ATC had transmitted the RVR as 200 m and visibility as 50 m with trend reducing. Another scheduled flight ahead of AI-890 carried out a missed approach and diverted to Ahmedabad. When the aircraft was above MDA (1480 feet AGL), ATC reported RVR 50 m and cleared the aircraft to land subject to minima. Both the flight crew maintained that they had seen the runway lights. ILS approach was performed with dual AP until 200ft RALT. After descending below MDA on auto pilot, the commander disconnected the auto pilot. Captain performed the final approach manually. The aircraft deviated to the left of the runway centre line and touched down on soft ground (in kutcha) on the LH side of the runway. During touchdown and landing roll, the visibility was zero and crew were unable to see any of the reference cues. The crew had heard rumbling sound during landing roll. As per the commander, he did the manual landing as he was not sure if he could do auto-land on a ground facility which is CAT I certified airfield in actual zero visibility. The aircraft continued to roll/ skid on the unpaved surface and during this period the left wing impacted trees causing damage to the left wing. Thereafter aircraft turned right and entered the runway finally coming to a halt on the LH side of runway. There was no fire. ATC Jaipur informed the Airport Manager of the Airline at Jaipur that their flight AI-890 had blocked the runway and also requested them to send equipments / manpower to attend the aircraft and get the aircraft removed. The Station AME of the airline alongwith the Asst Officer (Comm.), who was at the tarmac were instructed by the Station Manager to move to the aircraft. As per the AME, the visibility was almost nil and they could not move without the help of ‗Follow Me‘ Jeep. The ATC was informed to arrange the jeep to escort the personnel upto the aircraft. The AME after reaching the aircraft observed that the no. 1 main wheel of the aircraft had decapped/ damaged and the port side wing was damaged. The fuel remaining on board was 2400 kgs. The disembarkation of passengers was carried out on the runway itself and passengers were sent to the terminal building. Since the aircraft was not in a position to be either taxied or towed to the parking bay, the baggage of passengers was offloaded at the runway itself and sent to the terminal. One passenger suffered minor bruise on the knuckle of his right hand middle finger. He was attended to by the cabin crew in the aircraft and also by the doctor at the airport. Medical check-up of all the crew members including breathanalyser (BA) test was done by the medical officer, M.I. room Jaipur airport. The BA test was negative for all the crew members with a reading of 00.00. Since the aircraft was obstructing the runway, the airport was shut down for any further flight operations till the runway could be cleared. A NOTAM was issued to this effect. The aircraft was towed the next day to parking bay no.5 at terminal-1 by 1200 hrs and was later repositioned on a non-operational remote bay.

The aircraft departed Lucknow Airport in the morning on a flight to New Delhi-Indira Gandhi Airport with a crew of three (two pilot and a cabin crew) and three passengers, among them Shivpal Yadav, Minister by the Uttar Pradesh Government. Following an uneventful flight, the crew completed the approach to runway 27. After touch down, the left main gear collapsed and the aircraft slid on runway for about one km when the right main gear collapsed as well. Out of control, the aircraft veered off runway to the right and came to rest in a grassy area. All six occupants escaped uninjured while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The crew was completing a local training mission at Lohegaon Airport. On final approach to runway 28, the aircraft impacted ground, teared off several runway lights and came to rest. All three occupants escaped uninjured while the aircraft was damaged beyond repair.

The twin engine aircraft suffered an accident upon landing at Jorhat-Rowriah Airport, Assam. There were no casualties but the aircraft was damaged beyond repair. The exact circumstances of the mishap remain unknown.

M/s Air Charter Services Pvt Ltd. offered their aircraft VT-ACF for operating medical evacuation flight to pick one critically ill patient from Patna on 25/05/2011. The Aircraft took off from Delhi to Patna with two crew members, two doctors and one male nurse. The Flight to Patna was uneventful. The Air Ambulance along with patient and one attendant took off from Patna at 20:31:58 IST, the aircraft during arrival to land at Delhi crashed near Faridabad on a Radial of 145 degree and distance of 15.2 nm at 22:42:32 IST. Aircraft reached Patna at 18:31 IST. Flight Plan for the flight from Patna to Delhi was filed with the ATC at Patna via W45-LLK-R594 at FL260, planned ETD being 22:00 hours IST and EET of 2hours for a planned ETA at VIDP being 24:00 hours IST. The crew took self-briefing of the weather and same “Self Briefing” was recorded on the flight plan submitted at ATC Patna. The passenger manifest submitted at Patna indicated a total of 2 crew and 5 passengers inclusive of the patient. Weather at Patna at the time of departure was 3000m visibility with Haze. Total fuel on board for departure at Delhi was 1516 lts. The preflight/transit inspection of the aircraft at Patna was carried out by the crew as per laid down guidelines. The crew requested for startup at 20:21 IST from Patna ATC and reported airborne at 20:33:43 IST. The aircraft climbed and maintained FL 260 for cruise. On handover from Varanasi Area Control (Radar), the aircraft came in contact with Delhi Area Control (East) Radar at 21:53:40 IST at 120.9 MHz. At 21:53:40 IST aircraft was identified on Radar by squawking code 3313. At 22:02:05 IST the crew requested for left deviation of 10° due to weather, the same was approved by the RSR controller. At 22:05:04 IST the crew informed that they have a critical patient on board and requested for priority landing and ambulance on arrival. The same was approved by the RSR controller. The aircraft was handed over to Approach Control on 126.35 MHz at 22:28:03 IST. At 22:28:18 IST VT-ACF contacted TAR (Terminal Approach Radar) on 126.35 MHz and it was maintaining FL160. At 22:32:22 IST, VT-ACF was asked to continue heading to DPN (VOR) and was cleared to descend to FL110. At 22:36:34 IST, the TAR controller informed VT-ACF about weather on HDG 330°, the crew replied in “Affirmative” and requested for left heading. At 22:38:12 IST, TAR controller gave aircraft left heading 285° which was copied by the aircraft. The aircraft started turning left, passing heading 289, it climbed from FL125 to FL141. At 22:40:32 IST the TAR controller gave 3 calls to VT-ACF. At 22:40:43 IST aircraft transmitted a feeble call “Into bad weather”, at that instance the aircraft had climbed FL 146.Thereafter the aircraft was seen turning right in a very tight turn at a low radar ground speed and loosing height rapidly from FL146 to FL 016. Again at 22:41:32 IST TAR controller gave call to VT-ACF, aircraft transmitted a feeble call “Into bad weather. Thereafter the controller gave repeated calls on both 126.35 MHz and also 121.5 MHz, before the blip on radar became static on a radial of 145 degree at 15.2 nm from DPN VOR at 22:42:32 IST. All attempts to raise contact with the aircraft failed. The TAR controller then informed the duty WSO and also the ATC Tower. At 22:50:00 IST, the tower informed the WSO that they have got a call from the City Fire Brigade confirming that an aircraft has crashed near Faridabad in a congested residential area known as Parvatia Colony. After the accident, local residents of the area and police tried to put off the fire and extricate the bodies from the wreckage of the aircraft.

Air India Express flight IX-811/812 is a daily round trip between Mangalore and Dubai. The outbound flight IX-811 was uneventful and landed at Dubai at 23:44 hours Local Time. The airplane was serviced and refuelled. The same flight crew operated the return leg, flight IX-812. The airplane taxied out for departure at 01:06 LT (02:36 IST). The takeoff, climb and cruise were uneventful. There was no conversation between the two pilots for about 1 hour and 40 minutes because the captain was asleep. The First Officer was making all the radio calls. The aircraft reported position at IGAMA at 05:33 hours IST and the First Officer was told to expect an ILS DME Arc approach to Mangalore. At about 130 miles from Mangalore, the First Officer requested descent clearance. This was, however, denied by the ATC Controller, who was using standard procedural control, to ensure safe separation with other air traffic. At 05:46 IST, the flight reported its position when it was at 80 DME as instructed by Mangalore Area Control. The aircraft was cleared to 7000 ft and commenced descent at 77 DME from Mangalore at 05:47 IST. The visibility reported was 6 km. Mangalore airport has a table top runway. As the AIP India states "Aerodrome located on hilltop. Valleys 200ft to 250ft immediately beyond paved surface of Runway." Owing to the surrounding terrain, Air India Express had made a special qualification requirement that only the PIC shall carry out the take off and landing. The captain on the accident flight had made a total of 16 landings in the past at this airport and the First Officer had operated as a Co-pilot on 66 flights at this airport. While the aircraft had commenced descent, there was no recorded conversation regarding the mandatory preparation for descent and landing briefing as stipulated in the SOP. After the aircraft was at about 50 miles and descending out of FL295, the conversation between the two pilots indicated that an incomplete approach briefing had been carried out. At about 25 nm from DME and descending through FL184, the Mangalore Area Controller cleared the aircraft to continue descent to 2900 ft. At this stage, the First Officer requested, if they could proceed directly to Radial 338 and join the 10 DME Arc. Throughout the descent profile and DME Arc Approach for ILS 24, the aircraft was much higher than normally expected altitudes. The aircraft was handed over by the Mangalore Area Controller to ATC Tower at 05:52 IST. The Tower controller, thereafter, asked the aircraft to report having established on 10 DME Arc for ILS Runway 24. Considering that this flight was operating in WOCL (Window Of Circadian Low), by this time the First Officer had also shown signs of tiredness. This was indicated by the sounds of yawning heard on the CVR. On having reported 10 DME Arc, the ATC Tower had asked aircraft to report when established on ILS. It appears that the captain had realized that the aircraft altitude was higher than normal and had selected Landing Gear 'DOWN' at an altitude of approximately 8,500 ft with speed brakes still deployed in Flight Detent position, so as to increase the rate of descent. As indicated by the DFDR, the aircraft continued to be high and did not follow the standard procedure of intercepting the ILS Glide Path at the correct intercept altitude. This incorrect procedure led to the aircraft being at almost twice the altitude as compared to a Standard ILS Approach. During approach, the CVR indicated that the captain had selected Flaps 40 degrees and completed the Landing Check List. At 06:03 hours IST at about 2.5 DME, the Radio Altimeter had alerted an altitude of 2500 ft. This was immediately followed by the First Officer saying "It is too high" and "Runway straight down". In reply, the captain had exclaimed "Oh my god". At this moment, the captain had disconnected the Auto Pilot and simultaneously increased the rate of descent considerably to establish on the desired approach path. At this stage, the First Officer had queried "Go around?" To this query from the First Officer, the captain had called out "Wrong loc .. ... localiser .. ... glide path". The First Officer had given a second call to the captain for "Go around" followed by "Unstabilized". However, the First Officer did not appear to take any action, to initiate a Go Around. Having acquired the runway visually and to execute a landing, it appears that the captain had increased the rate of descent to almost 4000 ft per minute. Due to this, there were numerous warnings from EGPWS for 'SINK RATE' and 'PULL UP'. On their own, the pilots did not report having established on ILS Approach. Instead, the ATC Tower had queried the same. To this call, the captain had forcefully prompted the First Officer to give a call of "Affirmative". The Tower controller gave landing clearance thereafter and also indicated "Winds calm". The aircraft was high on approach and touched down on the runway, much farther than normal. The aircraft had crossed the threshold at about 200 ft altitude with indicated speed in excess of 160 kt, as compared to 50 ft with target speed of 144 kt for the landing weight. Despite the EGPWS warnings and calls from the First Officer to go around, the captain had persisted with the approach in unstabilized conditions. Short of touchdown, there was yet another (Third) call from the First Officer, "Go around captain...We don't have runway left". However, the captain had continued with the landing and the final touchdown was about 5200 ft from the threshold of runway 24, leaving approximately 2800 ft of remaining paved surface. The captain had selected Thrust Reversers soon after touchdown. Within 6 seconds of applying brakes, the captain had initiated a 'Go Around', in contravention of Boeing SOP. The aircraft overshot the runway including the strip of 60 metres. After overshooting the runway and strip, the aircraft continued into the Runway End Safety Area (RESA) of 90 metres. Soon after which the right wing impacted the localiser antenna structure located further at 85 metres from the end of RESA. Thereafter, the aircraft hit the boundary fence and fell into a gorge.

As per the NOTAM, Runway 14/32 was under permanent maintenance on every Tuesdays since 10/11/2009 runway 27 was available only after runway intersection as runway 27A. To carry out operations on this reduced runway 27 a NOTAM ‘G’ No. G 0128/08 was issued by AAI on the same day of accident i.e. 10-11-2009 and designated as runway 27A for visual approach only. As per the NOTAM Landing Distance Available (LDA)/take off Distance available (TODA) was 1703 m. The weather conditions prevailing at the time of accident was winds 070/07 knots visibility 2800 m with feeble rain. Prior to Kingfisher aircraft, Air India aircraft IC-164, Airbus 319 had landed and reported to ATC that it had aquaplaned and broken two runway edge lights. The ATC acknowledged it and sent runway inspection vehicle to inspect the runway. The ATC person was not familiar with the terminology of ‘aquaplaning’ and not realizing the seriousness of it, cleared kingfisher aircraft for landing. At the time of accident there were water patches on the runway. ATC also did not transmit to the Kingfisher aircraft the information regarding aquaplaning reported by the previous aircraft. The DFDR readout revealed that kingfisher aircraft was not on profile as per localizer procedure laid down in NOTAM ‘G’ and was high and fast. The aircraft landed late on the runway and the runway length available was around 1000 m from the touchdown point. In the prevailing weather conditions this runway length was just sufficient to stop the aircraft on the runway. During landing the kingfisher aircraft aquaplaned and did not decelerate even though reversers and full manual braking was applied by both the cockpit crew. The aircraft started skidding toward the left of center line. On nearing the runway end, the pilot initiated a 45 ° right turn, after crossing ‘N 10’ Taxi track, the aircraft rolled into unpaved wet area. Aircraft rolled over drainage pipes & finally came to a stop near open drain. There was no fire. All the passenger safely deplaned after the accident.

Following a supply mission, the aircraft departed Kargong-Mechuka Airport (Mechuka Advanced Landing Ground) at 1400LT on a flight to Dibrugarh-Mohanbari Airport. Shortly after takeoff, while flying an altitude of 12,000 feet, the aircraft struck the slope of Mt Rinchi located near the village of Tato. The wreckage was found a day later about 25 km southeast of Mechuka. The aircraft was destroyed and all 13 occupants were killed.