2016 Malta Fairchild Merlin crash

Last updated
Malta Fairchild Merlin crash
Swearingen SA-227AT Merlin IV C Private N577MX, LUX Luxembourg (Findel), Luxembourg PP1313341186.jpg
N577MX, the aircraft involved in the accident, photographed in 2011
Accident
Date24 October 2016 (2016-10-24)
SummaryMechanical Failure
Site Malta International Airport, near Kirkop, Malta
35°50′38.5″N14°29′29.3″E / 35.844028°N 14.491472°E / 35.844028; 14.491472
Aircraft
Aircraft type Fairchild SA227-AT Merlin IVC
Operator CAE Aviation
Registration N577MX
Flight origin Malta International Airport
DestinationMalta International Airport
Occupants5
Crew5
Fatalities5
Survivors0

On 24 October 2016, a twin turboprop Fairchild SA227-AT Merlin IVC operated by CAE Aviation crashed near Kirkop, Malta, shortly after take-off from Malta International Airport. The aircraft was to operate in the vicinity of Misrata in Libya on a surveillance mission by the French Ministry of Defence. All five people on board the aircraft died in the crash, making it the deadliest aviation accident in Malta since 1975. [1]

Contents

Aircraft

The aircraft involved was a Fairchild SA227-AT Merlin IVC, registered in the United States as N577MX. [2] The aircraft, which had been built in 1983, [3] did not have a history of technical issues, [4] and had last undergone an airworthiness inspection in 2011. [5]

The aircraft belonged to Worldwide Aircraft Services [3] and at the time of the crash was leased to Luxembourg-based CAE Aviation, operating on behalf of the French Ministry of Defence. [4]

The SA227 is capable of being flown either by a single pilot or by two pilots. On the accident flight, the aircraft was being flown by a single pilot accompanied by a monitoring pilot. The monitoring pilot was not certified to fly SA227 aircraft, nor was he required to be. [6]

Accident

The aircraft took off from Malta International Airport at around 07:20, bound for Misrata in Libya on a surveillance flight; and was due to land back at Malta at the conclusion of the mission. Just after takeoff, the aircraft pitched up to an unusual attitude, rolled right, and crashed into the ground, bursting into flames upon impact. [7] The wreckage landed on the airport perimeter road within the limits of the village of Kirkop, [8] with some debris falling into a nearby Armed Forces of Malta barracks. All five people on board, three passengers and two crew members, died in the crash. All were French nationals, and the passengers were employees of the defence ministry, while the crew worked for CAE Aviation. [4] [9]

Aftermath

Immediately after the crash, the staff at Mater Dei Hospital were placed in major incident mode. The Malta International Airport was shut down for four hours after the crash before reopening at 11:30. Many flights that were bound to Malta had to be diverted to Sicily. [4] [10]

The Maltese government issued a statement that the flight was part of a French customs surveillance operation to combat drug- and human trafficking that had been ongoing for five months. [11] However, the French customs department tweeted that none of its officials were on board, and French Minister of Defence Jean-Yves Le Drian later said that three of the dead were defence ministry employees within the Directorate-General for External Security. [4] However, Maltese Minister for Home Affairs and National Security Carmelo Abela stuck to the government's original statement that the aircraft was involved in a customs operation, and the flight's exact purpose was unclear. [2] [12]

Aviation experts, as well as Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, stated that the crash was likely a result of a mechanical failure or pilot error. [4] [13] Malta's Bureau of Air Accident Investigation had responsibility for conducting an investigation of the accident. [5]

This was the worst aviation accident on Maltese soil since the 1975 Żabbar Avro Vulcan crash that killed six people and injured another twenty. [14]

Investigation

The aircraft was not fitted with a flight data recorder or a cockpit voice recorder. However, the crash was recorded by multiple cameras, several of which also recorded audio. When combined with data retrieved from the memory in a GPS receiver located in the wreckage, a fairly accurate reconstruction of the aircraft's final moments could be created. The takeoff roll proceeded normally, however after leaving the ground the aircraft continued to pitch upwards, reaching a nose high attitude of 34 degrees within four seconds of rotation. At this point, the aircraft rolled to the right, consistent with a power-on stall (due to the direction of rotation of the propellers, the right wing will stall before the left one at high engine power). The aircraft reached a maximum right bank angle of 152 degrees, at which point the direction of the roll reversed. The aircraft struck the ground at a 70 degree right bank and 38 degree nose-down pitch, just ten seconds after lifting off. Analysis of the audio from several security cameras found no evidence of engine problems, nor could any engine issue explain the aircraft's performance. [6]

The aircraft had undergone substantial modifications to its flight control system in 1985; several cables had been re-routed to accommodate the special surveillance equipment installed. The aircraft's stick pusher system, known on the Merlin as the stall avoidance system (SAS), had also been altered for this reason. An examination of the bulb filaments in the cockpit annunciator panel revealed that at some point prior to impact, the SAS FAULT annunciator had illuminated. In addition, recent maintenance had been performed to the aircraft's flight control system, but maintenance instructions for the modified version of the system were not available when this was done. Damage to the wreckage prevented a conclusive analysis of the primary flight controls or the SAS. Based on the performance of the aircraft, the evidence recovered from the wreckage and a study of previous incidents involving aircraft in the same family, the BEA narrowed the cause of the crash to three possibilities. [6]

Possible causes

The most plausible of the three would have been a failure or jamming in the nose down cable of the elevator control system. This scenario would explain why the aircraft continued to pitch up beyond the recommended climb attitude after rotation. In this case, the pilot would not have been able to counteract the upwards moment through pushing forward on the control column. Depending on the nature of the failure, the control column itself would not necessarily have jammed, which would have made the problem more difficult to recognize immediately. The only way to overcome an elevator control failure would be through the pitch trim system, but the aircraft reached a stall situation too quickly for this to be effective. [lower-alpha 1] As the aircraft approached a stall, the stick pusher would have activated. As the pusher servo is connected to the same control cabling as the control column, it would have been unable to function correctly, explaining the illumination of the SAS FAULT light. [6]

A less likely but still possible hypothesis was an inadvertent activation of the stick pusher system. This was considered possible due to the relocation of the SAS components to an area near a water evacuation drain on the aircraft. If the pusher servo had activated at the point of rotation, the pilot may have reflexively pulled against it with enough force to disable it, causing an abrupt pitch-up. Inadvertent SAS activation had happened on other SA-227 aircraft. However, the aircraft's flight path did not fully support this scenario. If the stick pusher had activated erroneously and been over-corrected by the pilot, the aircraft would likely have pitched down slightly before rapidly pitching up. Instead, the upwards pitch was more or less constant until the moment the aircraft stalled. Nevertheless, without more accurate flight data, the theory could not be ruled out completely. [6]

The least likely of the three involved the antenna for the HF radio (consisting of a cable extending from the upper forward fuselage to the tip of the vertical stabiliser) snapping during rotation. Afterwards, the cable may have become wrapped around the right-hand elevator, jamming it upwards. The HF antenna is not standard equipment on the SA-227, and the type installed had been known to fail occasionally. In 1998, a cable had jammed the elevator of a SOCATA MS.893 into a nose-down position, causing a fatal crash. Regardless, no components from the cable were found on the runway, and the physics involved to cause the cable to jam the aircraft's elevators were considered extremely improbable. [6]

The final report concluded that whichever malfunction occurred "probably originated in the specific modifications of the aircraft and in the application of an inappropriate maintenance to these modifications." [6]

Notes

  1. Unlike most aircraft of its size, there is no elevator trim tab on the SA227. Instead, the pitch trim system consists of a trimmable horizontal stabiliser driven by one of two electrical actuators (one controlled by each pilot). The rear attachment points of the horizontal stabiliser form a pivot and the front of the stabiliser is attached to the actuators. Operating an actuator moves the front of the horizontal stabiliser up or down to adjust the pitch trim. It takes more than thirty seconds for an actuator to move the stabiliser from one end of its travel to the other. [15]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tailplane</span> Small lifting surface of a fixed-wing aircraft

A tailplane, also known as a horizontal stabiliser, is a small lifting surface located on the tail (empennage) behind the main lifting surfaces of a fixed-wing aircraft as well as other non-fixed-wing aircraft such as helicopters and gyroplanes. Not all fixed-wing aircraft have tailplanes. Canards, tailless and flying wing aircraft have no separate tailplane, while in V-tail aircraft the vertical stabiliser, rudder, and the tail-plane and elevator are combined to form two diagonal surfaces in a V layout.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stall (fluid dynamics)</span> Abrupt reduction in lift due to flow separation

In fluid dynamics, a stall is a reduction in the lift coefficient generated by a foil as angle of attack increases. This occurs when the critical angle of attack of the foil is exceeded. The critical angle of attack is typically about 15°, but it may vary significantly depending on the fluid, foil, and Reynolds number.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stick shaker</span> Mechanical device in an aircraft cockpit to warn the pilot of an imminent stall

A stick shaker is a mechanical device designed to rapidly and noisily vibrate the control yoke of an aircraft, warning the flight crew that an imminent aerodynamic stall has been detected. It is typically present on the majority of large civil jet aircraft, as well as most large military planes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aircraft flight control system</span> How aircraft are controlled

A conventional fixed-wing aircraft flight control system (AFCS) consists of flight control surfaces, the respective cockpit controls, connecting linkages, and the necessary operating mechanisms to control an aircraft's direction in flight. Aircraft engine controls are also considered as flight controls as they change speed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Empennage</span> Tail section of an aircraft containing stabilizers

The empennage, also known as the tail or tail assembly, is a structure at the rear of an aircraft that provides stability during flight, in a way similar to the feathers on an arrow. The term derives from the French language verb empenner which means "to feather an arrow". Most aircraft feature an empennage incorporating vertical and horizontal stabilising surfaces which stabilise the flight dynamics of yaw and pitch, as well as housing control surfaces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yoke (aeronautics)</span> Aircraft controls

A yoke, alternatively known as a control wheel or a control column, is a device used for piloting some fixed-wing aircraft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Air Midwest Flight 5481</span> 2003 aviation accident in North Carolina, United States

Air Midwest Flight 5481 was a Beechcraft 1900D on a regularly scheduled passenger flight from Charlotte Douglas International Airport in Charlotte, North Carolina, to Greenville–Spartanburg International Airport in Greer, South Carolina. On the morning of January 8, 2003, the Beechcraft stalled while departing Charlotte Douglas International Airport and crashed into an aircraft hangar, killing all 21 passengers and crew aboard and injuring one person on the ground.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner</span> Small airliner and executive aircraft family by Swearingen, later Fairchild

The Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner is a 19-seat, pressurized, twin-turboprop airliner first produced by Swearingen Aircraft and later by Fairchild Aircraft at a plant in San Antonio, Texas.

Aircraft upset is a dangerous condition in aircraft operations in which the flight attitude or airspeed of an aircraft is outside the normal bounds of operation for which it is designed. This may result in the loss of control (LOC) of the aircraft, and sometimes the total loss of the aircraft itself. Loss of control may be due to excessive altitude for the airplane's weight, turbulent weather, pilot disorientation, or a system failure.

A stick pusher is a device installed in some fixed-wing aircraft to prevent the aircraft from entering an aerodynamic stall. Some large fixed-wing aircraft display poor post-stall handling characteristics or are vulnerable to deep stall. To prevent such an aircraft approaching the stall the aircraft designer may install a hydraulic or electro-mechanical device that pushes forward on the elevator control system whenever the aircraft's angle of attack reaches the pre-determined value, and then ceases to push when the angle of attack falls sufficiently. A system for this purpose is known as a stick pusher.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ambrosini SS.4</span> Italian fighter prototype

The SAI-Ambrosini SS.4 was an Italian fighter prototype developed in the late 1930s, featuring a canard-style wing layout and a pusher propeller. Development of the SS.4 was abandoned after the prototype crashed on its second flight.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colgan Air Flight 9446</span> 2003 aviation accident near Massachusetts, United States

Colgan Air Flight 9446 was a repositioning flight operated by Colgan Air for US Airways Express. On August 26, 2003, the Beechcraft 1900D crashed into water 300 feet (91 m) offshore from Yarmouth, Massachusetts shortly after taking off from Barnstable Municipal Airport in Hyannis. Both pilots were killed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flight control modes</span> Aircraft control computer software

A flight control mode or flight control law is a computer software algorithm that transforms the movement of the yoke or joystick, made by an aircraft pilot, into movements of the aircraft control surfaces. The control surface movements depend on which of several modes the flight computer is in. In aircraft in which the flight control system is fly-by-wire, the movements the pilot makes to the yoke or joystick in the cockpit, to control the flight, are converted to electronic signals, which are transmitted to the flight control computers that determine how to move each control surface to provide the aircraft movement the pilot ordered.

Several aviation incidents and accidents have occurred in which the control surfaces of an aircraft became disabled, often due to failure of hydraulic systems or the flight control system. Other incidents have occurred where controls were not functioning correctly prior to take-off, either due to maintenance or pilot error, and controls can become inoperative from extreme weather conditions. Aircraft are not designed to be flown in such circumstances; however, a small number of pilots have had some success in flying and landing aircraft with disabled controls.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1949 MacRobertson Miller Aviation DC-3 crash</span> Accident in Western Australia

On 2 July 1949 a Douglas DC-3 aircraft departed from Perth, Western Australia for a night flight of 441 nautical miles (817 km) to Carnarvon. The aircraft climbed to a height of about 500 feet (150 m) and then spiralled almost vertically to the ground, killing all 18 people on board. It crashed about a mile north of Perth airport and burned for over an hour. At the time, it was the worst civil aviation accident in Western Australia.

In aeronautics, loss of control (LOC) is the unintended departure of an aircraft from controlled flight and is a significant factor in several aviation accidents worldwide. In 2015 it was the leading cause of general aviation accidents. Loss of control may be the result of mechanical failure, external disturbances, aircraft upset conditions, or inappropriate crew actions or responses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Air Algérie Flight 5017</span> July 2014 plane crash in Mali

Air Algérie Flight 5017 was a scheduled international passenger flight from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, to Algiers, Algeria, which crashed near Gossi, Mali, on 24 July 2014. The McDonnell Douglas MD-83 twinjet with 110 passengers and 6 crew on board, operated by Swiftair for Air Algérie, disappeared from radar about fifty minutes after take-off. There were no survivors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 Sunbird Aviation crash</span>

On 13 April 2016, a Britten-Norman BN-2T Turbine Islander operated by Sunbird Aviation crashed about 1,200 m short of runway 7 at Kiunga Airport in the Western Province of Papua New Guinea. The plane pitched up right before the crash, then dropped its right wing and fell almost vertically to the ground. Eleven passengers and the 31-year-old Australian pilot, Benjamin Picard, were killed. Nine people died on impact, with other three declared dead on arrival at Kiunga Hospital.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Atlas Air Flight 3591</span> Cargo flight involved in 2019 crash

Atlas Air Flight 3591 was a scheduled domestic cargo flight under the Amazon Air banner between Miami International Airport and George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston. On February 23, 2019, the Boeing 767-375ER(BCF) used for this flight crashed into Trinity Bay during approach into Houston, killing the two crew members and single passenger on board. The accident occurred near Anahuac, Texas, east of Houston, shortly before 12:45 CST (18:45 UTC). This was the first fatal crash of a Boeing 767 freighter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System</span> Boeing flight control system responsible for 346 deaths

The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant.

References

  1. "Malta air safety profile".
  2. 1 2 Vella, Matthew; Agius, Matthew (24 October 2016). "N577MX aircraft crash in Malta: 'The name of the game is silence'". Malta Today . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  3. 1 2 "FAA Registry N-Number Inquiry Results". Federal Aviation Administration . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "Watch: Five dead as plane crashes in Luqa". Times of Malta . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  5. 1 2 Dearden, Lizzie (24 October 2016). "Malta plane crash latest: French customs officials killed during take-off for people smuggling mission in Libya". The Independent . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "BEA Safety Investigation Report" (PDF). Aviation Safety Network. 2018-10-31.
  7. "Five people dead after small plane crashes in Malta". ITV . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  8. Borg, Bertrand (25 October 2016). "Watch: Burnt husk of a plane that came crashing down". Times of Malta . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  9. "French citizens killed in surveillance plane crash on Malta". BBC News . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  10. "Air travellers stranded for hours after crash". Times of Malta . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  11. McKirdy, Euan; Cullen, Simon; Shoichet, Catherine E. (24 October 2016). "Plane crash in Malta kills 5 in surveillance operation". CNN . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  12. Borg, Bertrand (24 October 2016). "What was the plane that crashed in Malta really doing?". Times of Malta . Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  13. "Plane crash appears to have been the result of fault, human error – Muscat". Times of Malta . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  14. "A timeline of aviation accidents in Malta". Times of Malta . 24 October 2016. Archived from the original on 25 October 2016.
  15. Fairchild SA227 Series Maintenance Manual, Chapter 27, Section 27-40