The Buffalo Airways DC-3 aircraft that crash-landed at the Yellowknife airport Aug. 19, 2013. A Transportation Safety Board report says the company had issues following safety regulations prior to the crash. - photo courtesy of David Connelly |
Crash report cites issues at Buffalo
Transportation Safety Board points to engine failure, overweight plane as contributing to 2013 crash landing
Shane Magee
Northern News Services
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE
An investigation into the crash landing of a Buffalo Airways DC-3C aircraft at the city airport in 2013 is highly critical of the company's safety procedures and Transport Canada's regulatory oversight.
The Aug. 19, 2013 flight from Yellowknife to Hay River was almost five per cent overweight when it took off from the runway, Transportation Safety Board investigators found.
After an engine failed during takeoff, the weight prevented the aircraft from being able to gain enough altitude before it ultimately crash landed.
"It's very disturbing," said Bill Mercer about what the investigation found. He was one of the 21 passengers and three crew on the flight that walked away uninjured.
"It's clear that there wasn't a good safety culture and that people had not been following safety procedures for a while," he said.
The airline was featured in the popular History channel show Ice Pilots NWT.
"Buffalo" Joe McBryan, president of the company, could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
The report cites a pattern of inspections by Transport Canada finding unsafe operations prior to the introduction of a safety management system several years before the crash.
The federal department is responsible for regulating the airline industry.
"The company would take action to address (issues) and, sometime later, the conditions would recur," the report states.
And even with the new safety system in place, several of the factors that contributed to the crash landing were not caught by Transport Canada inspectors prior to the accident.
The operator made repeated "diatribes" against Transport Canada and explicitly questioned the competence and motivation of its inspectors, the report states.
"The company refuted the regulatory basis of findings, questioned the competence of (Transport Canada) inspectors, and initially did not take responsibility for the issues identified," the report states.
The report further states that Transport Canada's approach to oversight "is at risk of failing to address unsafe practices and conditions."
Without changes, unsafe practices might not be uncovered and there could be a greater risk of accidents, the report states.
A request for an interview with Transport Canada was denied. The federal department did not reply by press time to a list of questions about the report.
Mercer said that given the choice, he wouldn't fly with Buffalo again.
However, he said he knows the company has taken steps to improve safety.
Since the crash, Buffalo has started to enforce the practice of weighing individual passengers and baggage to calculate weight prior to takeoff, according to the report.
It has also revised its operations manual and made organizational changes such as retraining the operations manager, hiring an operations consultant to assist with regulatory compliance and creating policies to ensure regulatory compliance.
Just after the wheels left the runway, a right-side engine component with a pre-existing fatigue crack failed and the engine caught fire.
The crew attempted to feather the blades to stop the propeller from spinning but it continued to windmill.
The partial feathering caused increased drag. That, combined with the flight being overweight, contributed to the aircraft being unable to maintain altitude.
The aircraft struck trees as it made a low altitude approach to the airport. It landed several hundred feet short of the runway.
Mercer remembers looking out the window at the rocky terrain and lakes not far below as the plane turned back for the airport.
"I realized how close we were about not making it," he told Yellowknifer Tuesday.
In addition to passengers and crew, the aircraft had cargo. No actual takeoff weight was determined, contravening the company's own procedures. An adult passenger would be assumed to be 200 pounds.
The board calculated the aircraft weighed 27,435 lbs at takeoff, 1,235 lbs above maximum certified take-off weight.
Investigators found that not calculating weight was a common practice by the airline at the time.
