What happened
On September 22, 2022, a Piper PA-38 with registration LV-OIB departed from the Puerta de Ávalos aerodrome in San Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina, to conduct a test flight following a 100-hour inspection. The flight, operated by the Jujuy Aeroclub, lasted approximately 40 minutes.
During the landing phase on runway 10, the pilot applied the nose wheel to the runway to begin deceleration. Upon contact, the pilot felt vibrations through the pedals. In an attempt to mitigate the vibration, the pilot applied back pressure to reduce the load on the nose gear. However, a loud noise was heard from the front of the aircraft, followed by the immediate collapse of the nose gear. The impact caused the propeller to strike the ground and the engine to stop abruptly. The failure of the gear caused the nose wheel to detach and strike the lower fuselage, damaging the engine cowling and the exhaust pipe.
The investigation
The investigation focused on the structural integrity of the nose landing gear. Investigators examined the nose landing gear oleo cylinder housing (P/N 777 and 81-03) and confirmed it had fractured. A review of maintenance records showed that the component had undergone a dye penetrant inspection on October 18, 2021, at an authorized repair station. At the time of the accident, the component had accumulated 174 flight hours since that inspection, meaning it was within the manufacturer-recommended service interval.
Investigators also inspected the runway surface, which is unpaved, but found no potholes or uneven surfaces that could have contributed to the event. While the investigation team requested a metallographic study to identify the specific nature of the fracture, the aircraft owner opted not to proceed with the analysis due to the high costs involved.
Findings
- The fracture of the nose landing gear oleo cylinder housing was the primary cause of the gear collapse and subsequent aircraft damage.
- The aircraft was within its required maintenance schedule, as the last specialized inspection had been performed within the prescribed timeframe.
- The previous non-destructive testing (NDT) report indicated no detectable defects in the component.
- Internal or subsurface flaws could not be identified because a metallographic study of the fractured part was not performed.