Casualties unknown

2018-07-04: Britten-Norman BN-2B-21 Islander (VP-AEJ) — 4 July 2018 On approach to Robert L Bradshaw Airport, Saint Kitts, GB

4 July 2018 On approach to Robert L Bradshaw Airport, Saint Kitts, GB

On July 4, 2018, a Britten-Norman BN-2B-21 Islander (registration VP-AEJ) was involved in an aviation accident near 4 July 2018 On approach to Robert L Bradshaw Airport, Saint Kitts, GB. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: An aileron drive rod bearing had corroded and seized which resulted in the drive rod becoming overloaded and failing under normal operational loads. This summary draws on records from the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB).

Sourcesthe UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB)Primary reportUpdated 1785658417Data APIEditorial standards

A Britten-Norman BN-2B-21 Islander suffered a broken aileron drive rod due to a corroded and seized bearing. The aircraft landed safely; no injuries occurred.

Introduction

On 4 July 2018, a Britten-Norman BN-2B-21 Islander, registration VP-AEJ, experienced a serious incident during approach to Robert L. Bradshaw Airport in Saint Kitts. The aircraft was operating a commercial air transport passenger flight between Saint Eustatius and Saint Kitts in the Caribbean. The sole pilot and four passengers were unharmed, and the aircraft sustained damage to the aileron drive rod.

History of the Flight

The flight departed from Runway 06 at F. D. Roosevelt Airport on Saint Eustatius at 1930 UTC. Shortly after takeoff, the pilot noticed that the ailerons felt “sluggish” during a right turn. Given the short flight duration of approximately 10 to 12 minutes, the pilot continued to Saint Kitts and landed safely at 1942 UTC. The passengers disembarked normally. During a post-flight walk-around inspection, the pilot discovered that the right aileron drive rod had fractured. The maintenance organisation was informed.

Examination

On the evening of the incident, maintenance personnel replaced the broken aileron drive rod in the right wing. An examination of the failed rod revealed that the spherical bearing at the rod end connecting to the aileron was heavily corroded and had seized. The rod had fractured due to overload approximately 70 mm from the rod end, at a riveted area.

Analysis

The aircraft manufacturer assessed that the failure was initiated by bearing corrosion, which led to seizure. Under normal operational loads applied to the aileron drive mechanism, the seized bearing caused the rod to become overloaded and fracture. The manufacturer issued Service Letter SL 127, “Greasing of Aileron Rod End Bearings,” to remind operators of greasing requirements and gather feedback on bearing corrosion.

The maintenance organisation noted that the Caribbean coastline had recently experienced large quantities of decomposing Sargassum seaweed, which releases hydrogen sulphide. Combined with recent storms and hurricanes, these environmental factors may have accelerated corrosion in certain components. The aircraft’s maintenance programme specified a lubrication interval of 1,000 hours, but the organisation reduced this to 100 hours to prevent recurrence. A fleet-wide inspection of all drive rods and bearings was also initiated.

Conclusion

The serious incident occurred because an aileron drive rod bearing corroded and seized, causing the drive rod to overload and fail under normal operational loads. The operating environment may have been more corrosive than anticipated when the lubrication tasks were defined in the aircraft maintenance programme.

Safety Actions

The aircraft manufacturer published Service Letter SL127 to emphasise greasing requirements and solicit feedback. The maintenance organisation reduced the lubrication interval for aileron drive rod bearings from 1,000 hours to 100 hours and initiated a fleet-wide corrosion inspection of all drive rod and bearing assemblies.

Probable cause

An aileron drive rod bearing had corroded and seized which resulted in the drive rod becoming overloaded and failing under normal operational loads. It is possible that the operating environment was more corrosive than the aircraft manufacturer expected when defining the lubrication tasks in the aircraft maintenance programme.