What happened
On May 31, 2021, a TECNAM P2010, registration F-HFMO, was conducting an instructor standardization flight at Tours - Val de Loire airport. The crew consisted of an instructor pilot-in-command, a pilot, and a passenger, all of whom were instructors for the operator, Air Paris Academy Training (APA).
During the takeoff roll, the aircraft performed nominally, rotating at 63 kt. However, once the aircraft reached a height of approximately 80 ft and a speed of 67 kt, the pilot-in-command sharply reduced power to simulate an engine failure. Following the power reduction, the pilot attempted to maintain speed by pushing the stick forward, but the aircraft's airspeed continued to decrease. The aircraft rapidly lost altitude and collided with the runway. The impact caused the collapse of the nose gear and the left main landing gear, and the left wing made contact with the ground. The aircraft slid along the runway, pivoted 90 degrees, and came to a stop. One person on board sustained injuries.
The investigation
The BEA examined the flight data from the G1000 on-board computer, which confirmed that the power reduction occurred at 80 ft AGL. The investigation also reviewed the operator's Operations Manual (OM), which explicitly stated that engine failure after takeoff (EFATO) simulations should not be initiated until the aircraft reaches at least 300 ft AGL.
Investigators also looked into the authorization of the flight. It was established that the pilot-in-command was not on the approved list of instructors authorized to conduct standardization sessions due to insufficient experience on this specific aircraft type. Furthermore, an external audit of the ATO revealed issues including high instructor turnover, degraded standardization, and a lack of communication regarding internal procedures.
Findings
- The engine failure exercise was initiated at an insufficient height and speed, leaving the aircraft with inadequate energy to recover.
- The flight was conducted by an instructor who was not authorized to perform standardization duties according to the company's manual.
- There was a lack of effective communication regarding the company's operational documentation and safety procedures.
- The rapid expansion of the ATO's structure and the pressure to quickly standardize new instructors contributed to the unsafe environment.