What happened
The sequence of events began with an aborted takeoff that was directly attributed to icing within the engine inlets. As the aircraft taxied from the ramp to the runway, moisture present on the wet ground surface was ingested into the engines. At this stage, the pilot did not engage the engine anti-ice system because there was no visible moisture to indicate a need for it.
After aborting the initial takeoff attempt, the pilot activated the engine anti-ice system. However, unbeknownst to him, the system was incapable of de-icing the engines under these conditions. Suspecting that ice might have been the cause of the earlier issue, though without certainty, the pilot conducted a full-power engine run-up before attempting another takeoff.
The engine indications appeared normal prior to brake release, leading the pilot to proceed with the takeoff. Shortly after liftoff, however, the aircraft experienced a loss of power on both engines, forcing an aborted flight. Upon returning to the ramp, investigators found one-quarter inch of ice accumulated on the engine inlet bullets.
The investigation
Post-flight inspection revealed significant ice accumulation on critical engine components. Specifically, one-quarter inch of ice was discovered on the engine inlet bullets after the aircraft taxied back to the ramp. This physical evidence confirmed that ice had formed despite the pilot's attempts to mitigate the issue through anti-ice activation.
Findings
The primary contributing factor was the ingestion of moisture from the wet ramp during taxiing, which led to engine inlet icing. The failure of the engine anti-ice system to prevent or remove this ice played a crucial role in the subsequent power loss. The pilot's reliance on visual cues for moisture detection proved insufficient, as invisible moisture conditions can still lead to dangerous ice accumulation.