What happened
On April 10, 2018, at approximately 23:30 UTC, a Cessna 150M, registration PR-WDB, was conducting a night visual flight training mission at Campo Grande Airport (SBCG) in Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. The aircraft was operated by a flight school and carried an instructor and a student pilot.
During the third landing attempt of the flight, while performing a ground maneuver, the crew experienced a violent impact on the left main landing gear. This impact caused a strong leftward yaw. Although the instructor managed to maintain control and bring the aircraft back toward the center of the runway, a subsequent contact with the ground caused the aircraft to veer sharply to the left. The aircraft eventually came to a stop in a grassy area adjacent to taxiway ECHO. Both occupants of the aircraft were uninjured, but the aircraft sustained substantial damage.
The investigation
CENIPA investigators confirmed that the accident was caused by a collision with wildlife. Evidence found at the scene included hair from a capybara caught between the tire and the wheel hub, as well as a dead capybara located on the runway immediately following the event. The investigation also revealed that the airport's operational perimeter fence had a gap of approximately 100 meters near a military operator's apron. Traces of feces and footprints indicated that animals had used this opening to enter the operational area.
Furthermore, the investigation found that while the airport operator had a Wildlife Risk Management Program (PGRF) in place, it had been developed without a prior Wildlife Hazard Identification (IPF) process. This lack of specific identification meant that the program lacked the scientific basis needed to prioritize risks and implement targeted preventive measures, such as the completion of the perimeter fencing.
Findings
- Wildlife presence was a direct contributing factor to the collision.
- Infrastructure deficiencies, specifically a significant gap in the airport's perimeter fencing, allowed animals to access the runway.
- The airport's wildlife management program was ineffective due to the absence of a prior Wildlife Hazard Identification (IPF).
- There was a lack of coordination in the Wildlife Risk Management Commission, as military operators—who were stakeholders in the area where the fence was broken—did not participate in recent management meetings.