No fatalities

2010-03-18: Antonov AN-26 (SP-FDO) — Exin — Tallinn-Lennart Meri-Ülemiste, Estonia

Tallinn-Lennart Meri-Ülemiste, EstoniaLanding (descent or approach)

On March 18, 2010, an Antonov AN-26 (registration SP-FDO) operated by Exin was involved in an aviation accident near Tallinn-Lennart Meri-Ülemiste, Estonia during landing or approach. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: Causes of the accident: 1. The failure of the left engine lubrication oil system, leading to the failure of the rear compressor bearing and inflight engine failure. 2. This summary draws on records from the Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A); 1 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

Sourcesthe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A)Primary reportUpdated 1781196213Data APIEditorial standards
Aircraft registered SP-FDO
Aircraft registered SP-FDO. Photo: jaan@flickr / CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

An Exin Co An-26B cargo aircraft suffered a left engine failure after takeoff from Helsinki. The crew attempted an emergency landing but overran the runway, crash-landing on a frozen lake. All six occupants escaped without serious injury.

Flight Details

On the morning of 18 March, Exin Co operated an Antonov An-26B on regular cargo flight EXN3589 from Helsinki to Tallinn. The aircraft had arrived in Helsinki the previous afternoon from Tallinn without incident. Four crew members, a company mechanic, and one cargo attendant were on board. The takeoff weight was 23,954 kg, 46 kg below maximum takeoff weight. The crew used the RU19-300 auxiliary power unit (APU) for additional thrust during takeoff, as prescribed in the aircraft flight manual, and shut it down after departure.

Engine Failure and Approach Difficulties

The flight was uneventful until 08:14:50 UTC, when the aircraft was 9.5 nautical miles from runway 26 at Helsinki. As the power levers were retarded to flight idle, the crew noticed engine vibration and a smell of smoke in the cockpit. The engine chip detector indicator illuminated. After a brief discussion about which engine to shut down, the flight engineer shut down the left engine. The captain attempted to start the RU19A-300 APU to regain thrust, but the attempts failed.

During the approach, the air traffic controller observed the aircraft deviating left of the approach path and alerted the crew. According to flight data and cockpit voice recorder data, the crew could not maintain a proper approach path laterally or vertically. Visual contact with the runway was established only 0.5 nautical miles from the threshold. The aircraft crossed the airport boundary not configured for landing, at an indicated airspeed of 295–300 km/h. Flaps were extended to 10 degrees over the threshold; the landing gear was lowered after passing the threshold and then retracted again. The aircraft performed a high-speed low pass over the runway at an altitude of 10–15 feet, with the landing gear cycling down and up. Flaps were extended over the runway and then retracted again seconds before impact.

Crash-Landing

At the end of the runway, full power was selected on the right engine. The aircraft climbed to 15–20 feet and began a left turn. The crew retracted the flaps and lowered the landing gear. The aircraft crossed the highway at the end of the runway at an altitude of approximately 30 feet, then descended, collided with treetops at the lake shore, and crash-landed on the snow- and ice-covered lake waterline. The thick ice kept the aircraft on the surface; it slid 151 meters on a heading of 238 degrees before stopping. After impact, the flight engineer shut down the right engine and discharged all engine fire extinguishers. All occupants escaped through the main door immediately.

Probable Cause

The official investigation identified the following causes: The failure of the left engine lubrication oil system, leading to the failure of the rear compressor bearing and in-flight engine failure; and the failure of the crew to maintain the approach path and adhere to single-engine landing procedures. Contributing factors included improper and insufficient crew training (including complete absence of simulator training), lack of effective coordination among crewmembers, failure to start the RU19A-300 APU, adverse weather conditions, inadequate company supervision by the Polish CAA (which did not notice the lack of flight crew training and the company's generally poor safety culture), and inadequate company maintenance practices that left a preexisting breather duct failure unnoticed.