No fatalities

2016-04-20: Beechcraft 1900D (C-FEVA) — Air Canada Express — Gander, Canada

Gander, CanadaLanding (descent or approach)

On April 20, 2016, a Beechcraft 1900D (registration C-FEVA) operated by Air Canada Express was involved in an aviation accident near Gander, Canada during landing or approach. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: 1. Neither pilot had considered that the combination of landing at night, in reduced visibility, with a crosswind and blowing snow, on a runway with no centreline lighting, was a hazard that may create additional risks. 2. This summary draws on records from the Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A); 3 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

Sourcesthe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A)Primary reportUpdated 1781192447Data APIEditorial standards

Air Canada Express flight EV7804, a Beechcraft 1900D (C-FEVA), veered right on landing at Gander, struck a snow windrow, collapsing the nose gear. Three passengers sustained minor injuries; aircraft substantially damaged.

Accident Description

On a scheduled passenger flight from Goose Bay to Gander, Newfoundland and Labrador, the Exploits Valley Air Services Beechcraft 1900D (registration C-FEVA, serial number UE-126), operating as Air Canada Express flight EV7804, experienced an accident during landing. At 2130 Newfoundland Daylight Time, while landing on Runway 03, the aircraft touched down to the right of the centreline and immediately veered right. The nosewheel struck a compacted snow windrow on the runway, causing the nose landing gear to collapse. As the nose dropped, propeller blades struck the snow and runway surface. All left-side propeller blades and three right-side blades separated at the root. A piece of a right-side blade penetrated the cabin wall. The aircraft slid to a stop on the runway.

Injuries and Damage

All 14 passengers and 2 crew members evacuated the aircraft. Three passengers sustained minor injuries. The aircraft was substantially damaged. No post-impact fire occurred. The 121.5 MHz emergency locator transmitter did not automatically activate due to insufficient forward impact forces.

Findings as to Causes and Contributing Factors

The investigation identified several contributing factors:

  • Neither pilot had considered the hazards posed by landing at night, in reduced visibility, with a crosswind and blowing snow, on a runway without centreline lighting.
  • Blowing snow obscured runway centreline markings, reducing visual cues for the captain, exacerbated by no centreline lighting and a possible visual illusion.
  • Gusty crosswind caused the aircraft to drift right during the flare, unrecognized by the crew.
  • The captain likely had difficulty determining aircraft position during the flare.
  • The crew's decision to continue the landing was consistent with plan continuation bias.
  • The nosewheel struck the compacted snow windrow, collapsing the nose landing gear.

Findings as to Risk

The investigation highlighted risks:

  • Aircraft without 406 MHz-capable ELTs face increased risk of delayed search and rescue.
  • Lack of defined crosswind limits may lead to landings exceeding pilot capabilities.
  • Composite propeller blade separation can result in cabin penetration, risking occupant injury or death.
  • Crew resource management training, if not mandatory, may be overlooked, reducing hazard recognition.
  • Absence of modern safety management and robust safety culture increases unidentified hazards.
  • Sticking g-switches in ELTs may go undetected if multiple football throws are needed for activation, risking non-activation during accidents.

Probable cause

1. Neither pilot had considered that the combination of landing at night, in reduced visibility, with a crosswind and blowing snow, on a runway with no centreline lighting, was a hazard that may create additional risks. 2. The blowing snow made it difficult to identify the runway centreline markings, thereby reducing visual cues available to the captain. This situation was exacerbated by the absence of centreline lighting and a possible visual illusion caused by blowing snow. 3. Due to the gusty crosswind conditions, the aircraft drifted to the right during the landing flare, which was not recognized by the crew. 4. It is likely that the captain had difficulty determining aircraft position during the landing flare. 5. The flight crew’s decision to continue with the landing was consistent with plan continuation bias. 6. During landing, the nosewheel struck the compacted snow windrow on the runway, causing the nose landing gear to collapse.