N944FE

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On January 24, 2003, about 1015 central standard time, a Cessna 208B single-engine airplane, N944FE, was destroyed when it impacted terrain while landing at Ducote Airpark (TS65), San Angelo, Texas. The airplane was registered to Federal Express Corporation, Inc., of Memphis, Tennessee, and was operated by Baron Aviation Services, Inc., of Vichy, Missouri. The check airman, who held an airline transport pilot certificate, and the pilot who was receiving a Part 135 proficiency check and also held an airline transport pilot certificate, sustained serious injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and a flight plan was not filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. The local flight originated at 0832 from the San Angelo Regional Airport/Mathis Field (SJT), San Angelo, Texas, and was destined for Ducote Airpark.

According to the check pilot, the purpose of the flight was to administer an FAR Part 135 proficiency check. He stated that the last event he could remember of the flight was when he had simulated an engine failure while on approach to Ducote Airpark. According to communication and aircraft radar data provided by the Midland's Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) approach sector and Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON), the flight was practicing instrument approaches at SJT. At the completion of the VOR (Very high Omni-directional Range navigational aid) 21 approach, the flight crew requested a visual transition to Ducote Airport (which is located about 5 miles west of SJT). After conducting the missed approach, the flight departed the SJT airport area and proceeded west toward TS65. No further air traffic control communications were received.

Witnesses at Ducote Airpark stated that they heard the sound of an airplane engine "surging" and observed the airplane approaching the airport on a westerly heading. They observed the airplane about 100 to 200 feet above ground level in a descent. They observed the airplane’s wings bank left and right and the airplane then contacted the ground and struck power lines before coming to rest inverted. Witnesses stated that they smelled jet fuel fumes at the accident site. One pilot-rated witness reported that he observed about ¼ inch of clear and rime ice on the airplane’s protected surfaces and about ½ inch on the airplane’s unprotected surfaces.

An aircraft performance study was conducted by the NTSB's Vehicle Performance Division utilizing radar data from the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Continuous Data Recording at the San Angelo, Texas, Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-9). The study was derived from ASR data assuming steady, coordinated flight and did not account for any ice accumulations. Approximately 3 minutes before the accident, the flight crew indicated that they would proceed to Ducote. The study revealed that around 1008:30, while the airplane was at a pressure altitude of 3,100 feet (1,100 feet above the ground) the airplane's computed true airspeed began decreasing from 130 knots, to 92 knots at 1009:00. This decrease in airspeed was associated with a relatively rapid descent rate that began at 1008:45, from a 300-foot/minute (fpm) climb to a 1,300 fpm descent. The rate of descent remained at 1,300 fpm for about 45 seconds, before increasing to its maximum of 2,000 fpm prior to impacting the ground. The true airspeed further decreased to about 82 knots and fluctuated for the last 40 seconds of flight between 82 and 102 knots.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

Check Airman

The pilot who was acting as the check airman held an airline transport pilot certificate with a multi-engine airplane rating. He also held commercial and flight instructor certificates with single-engine and instrument airplane ratings. He was issued a second-class medical certificate, with no restrictions or limitations, on November 4, 2002.

The operator hired the pilot on August 31, 1998. He was approved as a check airmen in the Cessna 208 series of aircraft on July 2, 2001 by the company's principal operations inspector. A review of the pilot's annual resume, dated January 7, 2003, revealed that he had accumulated a total time of 4,356 hours.

He last obtained Cessna 208 training at Pan Am International Flight Academy between August 1 and 3, 2002, where he underwent 11 hours of ground training and 6 hours of simulator training. On October 25, 2002, the pilot passed an Anti-ice/Deicing Exam for Corporate Pilots following a review of a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) icing training video.

Second Pilot

The pilot receiving the Part 135 proficiency check also held an airline transport pilot certificate with a multi-engine airplane rating. He also held a commercial pilot certificate with a single-engine airplane rating. He was issued a second-class medical certificate, with no restrictions or limitations, on November 19, 2002.

The operator hired the pilot in April 1990. His latest annual resume, dated March 25, 2002, indicated that he had accumulated a total of 13,884 hours of flight time.

He last underwent Cessna 208 training at Pan Am International Flight Academy between June 27 and 29, 2002, where he received 11 hours of ground training and 5.5 hours of simulator training.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The 1987-model airplane was equipped with a 675-horsepower PT6A-114 Pratt & Whitney turboprop engine, and a 3-bladed C-300 McCauley propeller. The airplane was also equipped with a flight into known icing package that included pneumatic deicing boots on the wings, wing struts, main landing gear struts, cargo pod, and the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.

The airplane was maintained on Baron Aviation's 12-Phase Approved Aircraft Inspection Program (AAIP), and the company utilized Cessna's CESCOM program to track, schedule and report maintenance activity. A phase is completed every 200 hours with a 100-hour mini-check conducted in between each phase. On January 4, 2003, the airframe, engine, and propeller underwent a Phase I Inspection. At that time the airframe and engine had accumulated a total of 7,493.5 hours and 6,808 cycles, and the propeller had accumulated a total of 2,792.5 hours. At the time of the accident the airplane/engine accumulated a total of 7,503.7 hours and 6,818 cycles.

There was only one discrepancy recorded in the flight log during the 9 previous flights, which stated that a Phase I inspection was due. The flight log page for the accident flight was not recovered from the accident site.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

At 1053, the weather observation facility at SJT reported the following weather conditions: wind from 100 degrees at 7 knots, visibility 10 statute miles, an overcast ceiling at 2,300 feet agl, temperature -02 degrees Celsius, dew point -11 degrees Celsius, and an altimeter setting of 30.43 inches of mercury.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

On-scene documentation of the wreckage at the accident site was conducted by FAA inspectors from the San Antonio Flight Standard District Office (FSDO), and representatives from Cessna Aircraft Company, FedEx, and Baron Aviation. According to photographs and information supplied by those entities, the accident site was located at 31 degrees 20.99 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees 36.78 minutes west longitude, approximately ¼ mile from the approach end of TS65 runway 35 at an elevation of 1,203 feet mean sea level (msl). The wreckage path was oriented along a magnetic heading of 300 degrees for about 300 feet, where at the 170-foot mark, the airplane impacted a fence and a power line. The left wing created a 170-foot furrow in the dirt field leading up to the fence/power line.

The fuselage came to rest inverted. The left wing was separated from the fuselage but remained attached to the airframe via the aileron control cables. The empennage was partially separated from the airframe and came to rest adjacent to the airframe's left side, but with the top of the vertical stabilizer pointing toward the nose of the airplane and the leading edges of the horizontal stabilizers pointing up in the air. The empennage remained attached to the airframe by some sheet metal and control cables. According to Cessna, all of the flight controls were accounted for and remained attached to their respective hinges. The flaps were in the retracted position, which was verified by the flap selector, the indicator and the flap actuator position. No evidence of a flight control malfunction was observed.

The right fuel selector handle was in the ON position and both right fuel tank shutoff valves were open. The left fuel selector handle was in the OFF position, but both left fuel tank shutoff valves were open. The left control cable was severed. Witnesses reported smelling fuel immediately following the accident, and a significant amount of fuel was removed from both fuel tanks during the aircraft recovery process.

The engine controls were examined and found in the following positions:

Throttle - full forward

Propeller - full forward

Fuel Condition Lever - full forward

Emergency Power Lever - above stop gate, in emergency regime, with the copper safety wire separated

The engine was partially separated from the firewall and the propeller, which was separated from the engine aft of the propeller flange, was located approximately half way between the fence line and the final wreckage position. All three propeller blades remained attached to the hub. The engine and propeller were shipped to their respective manufacturers' facilities where they were examined in more detail.

TESTS AND RESEARCH

On March 10 & 11, 2003 the engine was examined at the Pratt & Whitney Canada facility in Montreal, Canada, under the provisions of the NTSB investigator-in-charge (IIC). The engine displayed impact damage; however, there was no evidence of a preimpact catastrophic failure. The compressor discharge air (P3) and power turbine control (Py)...