The air crash that changed aviation safety [AH002] 

My wife and I were on this aircraft, Fokker F27 “Abel Tasman”, exactly two weeks before the crash, flying in to Mackay from Proserpine. We were returning from our honeymoon on South Molle Island. I have a photo of it that I took at Mackay after we landed. We flew on to Brisbane on a TAA Viscount. I remember thinking at the time how lucky we had been, although the weather conditions at the time of our flight were excellent.

Sad memories for me. Three of the boys killed had been invited to my 13th birthday party which was to be held in North Eton next day. I had gone to school and played football with them for a few years before they headed off to boarding school in Rockhampton in 1960. My parents cancelled the party of course, and the small community at North Eton was devastated by the tragedy.😥

I think they misread the altimeter by 1000 feet. They were 4 miles out when they hit the sea. At a glide angle of 3 degrees that implies they should have been at 1100 feet. When in fact they were at 100 and then hit the sea on what they thought was the final turn.

The danger of approach over smooth water at night has not been mentioned in the posts. I was recently arrived (January 1960) in Brisbane and was rather attuned at age 10 to passenger travel. In December 1960 I had started in Calgary the flown - Winnipeg - Minneapolis - Duluth - Minneapolis - Seattle- Portland- SanFrancisco- Los Angles- Honolulu- Nandi- Auckland- Sydney-Brisbane. I read the reports in the Courier Mail and the Telegraph and listened to radio reports. The danger of the approach over water at night was part of the discussion and that Mackay was dangerous even in daylight for water especially smooth flat provides no reference for altitude. Note San Francisco is to this day a "difficult" approach over "the bay !!!"

Bureau of Aircraft Accidents says: "The Fokker F-27 aircraft was on a regular passenger flight from Brisbane (BNE) to Mackay (MKY) via Maryborough (MBH) and Rockhampton (ROK). The aircraft departed Brisbane at 17:11 and arrived at Maryborough at 17:52. It then took off at 18:12 on the next portion of the trip to Rockhampton where it landed without incident one hour later. Just prior to the landing at Rockhampton, the aircraft was advised of a special weather report which indicated shallow ground fog at Mackay to a height of 20 ft with a visibility of 880 yd, and also that an alternate aerodrome would be required for the rest of the flight. The flight departed Rockhampton at 19:52. On departure the air traffic controller at Mackay was advised that the expected flight time to Mackay was 52 minutes at an altitude of 13000 ft, that Townsville had been selected as the alternate. At 20:17 the aircraft reported at the prescribed reporting point, Charon Point, 80 miles south of Mackay at 130000 ft and gave its estimated time of arrival at Mackay as 20:40. It was advised that Mackay Airport was closed to landings at that time, and the situation remained the same when the aircraft reached the point at which it would normally have commenced its descent to Mackay. The captain indicated that he would continue the flight at 13000 ft and would hold over Mackay at that altitude. At 20:45 the ATC Officer advised the pilot that visibility was fluctuating between 2 and 2-1/2 miles along runway 14/32. The pilot replied that the airport lighting, the city area, and the surrounding country could be clearly seen, but that a belt of fog extending about 10 miles was situated to the southwest of the airport and was moving in a slightly northeasterly direction across the airport. The pilot then requested landing instructions. The aircraft was cleared to make a visual approach with a view to landing on runway 14. He reported on final approach, and at 20:55 the aircraft was cleared to land. As the aircraft approached close to the runway threshold at a height of about 50 feet, the pilot advised that a small patch of fog had suddenly appeared on the approach to the runway. It then flew along the runway at a height of approximately 50 ft and commenced to climb away. The pilot advised that he would look at the approach to runway 32. The ATC Officer next observed the aircraft descending to approach runway 32. It reached a height of approximately 200 ft, but before crossing the threshold it began to climb along the line of the runway, and the pilot requested permission to hold over Mackay at 5000 ft until an improvement in the weather occurred. This procedure was approved. The aircraft continued to hold over Mackay until about 22:00. At approximately 22:02 the ATC Officer noted the conditions improved rapidly and visibility was continually improving. When the aircraft was thus informed, it replied: "Roger tower, will commence let down to approach on runway 32". The aircraft was cleared for a visual approach and was given the wind (calm) and QNH (1019 mb) and was asked to report on final approach. Nothing more was heard from the flight. During the approach the airplane contacted the sea and crashed, some 12 km short of the runway. Probable cause: The investigation was not able to determine a probable cause of this accident. No evidence was found of material or structural defects, fire or an explosion on board, or any commotion or unusual act by any person in the aircraft. It is possible that something happened within the last 2-3 minutes as a result of which the pilot was unaware of his actual rate of descent. This could have been either caused by the instruments not accurately recording the altitude, or by the pilot relying on visual observation of his surroundings without paying (sufficient) attention to the instruments. The accident happened at night with very few visual clues." No mention of duty times and rest periods or whether the crew had any sleep during the daylight hours before embarking on this demanding multi-stop night flight. There's a significant fatigue factor from the loud whining Rolls-Royce Dart-507 engines and from airframe vibration and from frequent hands-on flying on instruments entering a holding pattern and two successive missed approaches and a third attempted approach. Assuming that the 1 year old turboprop had no last minute mechanical snafus, the probable cause would likely include a lack of dedicated instrument scan by the non flying pilot and spatial disorientation by both pilots.

I joined the Australian Department of Civil Aviation in May 1960 as a Communication (Air-ground) operator and often worked this type of aircraft. My view on the accident was as concluded: wing dipping into the water on a low turn. I suspect this was the same cause when, on New Year's Day 1964, VH-FRI, a Cessna 185 out of Sissano for Aitape, did the same thing. I was in Madang Operations Building (ATC Tower and Aeradio) whilst this search was being conducted. As it was, the pilot, who was the only person on board, was rescued by natives from the water. There was long delay from when he was rescued, until the natives, via a nearby mission, were able to tell us he was safe. Hence full SAR (Search and Rescue) when on right throughout that day.

I had vaguely heard about the Australian accident that paved the way for cockpit voice recorders, but never known about it. Thanks for the clip. I guess that withouta CVR, the investigators could only make suppositions.

My father was on duty in the control tower that evening and he knew that his nephew was on that flight😢

Situational awareness and trying to read that altimeter at night! Made my head spin. Thanks for the vid. I have flown on those in the US.

It would be very interesting to describe the similar accident occurred with also with a Friendship of the Angolan DTA in the late 60s or early 70s, close to the town of Lobito, ditching with full loss of lives.

Definitely loss of situational awareness by the pilots, for whatever reason. Can't think of any other reason for flying into the ocean! Didn't know that Australia pioneered the 'Black Box' though - fascinating!

The more I see or hear about this accident the more I keep thinking that it was pure and simple pilot error. The pilots had the weather forecast in Rockhampton that fog was rolling in at Mackay. Why the pilots decided to continue was anyone's guess but having that information should have been enough to ground the plane in Rocky until either the fog lifted or go again early morning. But they chose to continue and found the foggy conditions at Mackay. Any pilot today would not have hung around mackay for as long as the TAA F27 did and by all rights it should have flown onto it's alternate airport at Townsville.

Most likely, they simply flew into the ocean, having lost visual reference. Combined with a sense of "get there itis" as mentioned in the other post.

In a time before cockpit voice recorders, water crashes were often especially hard to interpret. It could have been literally any of the things you mentioned, or other events we'll never be aware of. Very sad.

Those Altimeters were crap, easily misread. I flew some older aircraft that still had this type of altimeter. Wouldnt be surprised at all if this was the cause of the crash.

I remember in primary school an excusion to the airport entailed us kids going for a taxi ride in a Fokker Friendship just around the airport. Seems bizarre today 😕.

Liked and subscribed 😊

3:25 “At about 3am in the morning”, as opposed to 3am in the afternoon.

NAC taken over by Air New Zealand loss a F27 into Auckland Airport water. This have 4 people on board not all survived. The number of people on board POB Person's on board becomes more important

NAC F27 in video. From New Zealand

I suspect the fire crew were to report RVR - runway visual range (how far on yards they could see whilst on the runway. There is a stipulated figure for an approved approach to land.

Spatial disorientation?

Interesting video. I like your presentation cadence and style.

Serious question. Was this why in Brisbane we used to joke TAA meant Try Another Airline? Or was it always a thing? I hadn’t previously been aware of this accident.

I always thought it was a trick of the runway lights appearing on the water. Under certain conditions this can happen

This doesn't have enough credit.

Actually Able Tasman was not the first European explorer to reach Australia, that was Dirk Hartog who explored the North West Coast of Western Australia at a location known as Shark Bay in 1616. And it's more probable that the Portuguese predate him, although this has not yet been proven. Englishman William Damper wasn't far behind either. Again the town of Dampier in the Pilbara region of Western Australia is named after him The first Europeans on the Australian mainland were actually Dutch mutineers by the name of Wouter Loos and Jan Pelgrom de Bye in 1629 , they had sexual relations with aboriginal women. Irish missionary Daisy Bates noticed that some Aboriginal children in WA had blonde hair and blue eyes and practiced European agricultural methods. Daisy Bates married Breaker Morant a Devonian migrant to South Australia who was subsequently executed by the British in South Africa for shooting Boer prisoners of war and a Lutheran missionary in South Africa.

I'm slightly confused, now. I used to play in a Fokker Friendship wreck, at Essendon Airport, when I was a kid. As far as I can recall, it was the Able Tasman. The plane was quite real. As far as I can remember it had the nose art of the Tasman. My father, who'd lived in Essendon, well before the airport was built, always said that that plane had landed at Essendon, and had a gear failure, rendering the craft damaged beyond repair, thus it was scrapped there and then. I recall that, a Bristol Freighter, and half a dozen Canberra bombers. Great times!

I wonder if there was icing reported in the area? Also, my dad who was a Naval Aviator and a flight engineer on a PBM-Y seaplane, and a private pilot warned me early on when I was learning how to fly, that the sky and ocean can look exactly same at night and the daytime, and Its very easy to lose your depth percepion and coupled with some vertigo fly right into the ocean. What ever happened it happened quick- no mayday.

I bet they pushed on below the "break off" height. 3rd attempt at landing. Is classic "Get there it-is." Flying is a DISCIPLINE. Pilots must be conservative. Wise. Patient. Good pilots are changed in their whole life, needing to be in control. Not easy on partners. CAVU skies to all aviators!

The three-pointer altimeter indicates 100s, 1000s and 10000s of feet. Better options have been developed since.

Cowboy approaches were not unknown on the F27 fleet at the time and especially on the multi-leg flight up the Queensland coast. I have watched a similar approach in 1999 in Tasmania (from the ground) that led to the captain of the aircraft being grounded for a period of time. That time it was in a Saab 340. Three point altimeters should not have been a problem in a properly conducted instrument approach.

sounds like mechanical failure and low altitude stall to me. Check maintenance records for problems?

Funny how most foreigners say Schiphol Amsterdam whilst not even being on Amsterdam grounds. Schiphol is entirly situated in the municipality of Haarlemmermeer. Hoofddorp,Badhoevedorp en Nieuw Vennep are a coupe of towns in that municipality. However it does clearly say AMS on your ticket if you fly to Schiphol,so i do not blame them. It is sad what the fate was of one of the worlds oldest aircraft manufacturer. Great video!

i live in Mackay, Australia, Queensland

misinterpretation of the altimeter ?

Could be wrong, but always thought this crash was the crash that led to the first crude flight recorders being developed. CVR's came much later. Any one know of a crash investigation that used flight recorders before 1960 ?

You called this the 2nd worst commercial crash by death toll. What was the worst? I believe this was equal worst commercial crash, sharing that dubious honour with the DC4 crash at York W.A.

did it run out of fuel??

13 degrees Celsius temperature and fog, What?

It happened at Stornaway Scotland too Lear jet or something similar.

spatial disoriention

I'm sure they wouldn't have been entertaining kids at that point because they would have been under a heavy workload landing etc

In 1964, an F-27 crashed in the Bay Area of San Francisco. The cause of that crash was ruled a murder-suicide when both pilots were shot by a passenger.

Yup, pilot error. Maybe a digital altimeter might of save them.

If the aircraft were fully configured for landing, and relying on a visual approach at night, they may have been flying low and slow, dis-orientated by no visual point of reference, and realising at the last minute that they were about to land on the water, pulled the nose of the aircraft sharply up and stalled the left wing which resulted in the aircraft impacting the water.

I guess they went too low.

Maybe they saw the moon reflection on the surface of the ocean if it was smooth and we’re is oranted and turned upside down and flew into the water

The clue lies in the attempted low level turn. It seems probable they were still actively tracking inbound (probably using an ADF). It is likely they couldn't see the runway at that distance because they crashed 5nm from the airport, too far for it to be seen in fog. One assumes they were unaware of their dangerously low altitude. The lack of an emergency radio call would also suggest they were unaware of their dangerous situation. Hence I think the altimeter confusion seems most likely.

Very good 👍

CFIT. Lost situational awareness.

A calm night,,fog on ground but whole town lit up for reference,,it isnt that hard to keep a plane level,,assuming the tower had some radar that would have alerted to being low even if altimeter unsure,,and no landing lights on to help figure it out,bizarre,,captain sank this ship,,

Hind sight has saved thousands of lives. Shame, aforethought could have saved thousands more.

You would need to give a whole lot more information for me to even begin to speculate on the cause of the accident. What was the fuel quantity in the tanks. What navaids did they have? Could there have been wing or static tube icing? It may be possible with a ground temperature of 13c. I can think of hundreds of scenarios.

The orange black box.

TAA Director of Engineering , John Watkins developed a theory centered upon a " brown bottle " discovered in the cockpit after recovery from the sea. The theory hinged upon the the assumption that it belonged to one of the schoolboys from Rockhampton Grammar School (RGS). Evidence given to the enquiry by Mr Elkins, who operated a taxi service in Rockhampton and who provided the coach transfer service to Rockhampton airport from the city and return for TAA is rarely mentioned. He testified to the enquiry about a person who claimed to be an ex US Marine and who was in an agitated and vocal condition. In evidence it was claimed that the person did not like the US Marine Corps. What if the bottle was the property of this man and not the property of the pupil of RGS. Instead of the bottle containing " acetone , toluol, ether fluids scrounged from Grammars Chem lab" the bottle contained chloroform.

I'm VERRY familiar to the Fokker F27. What i'm missing here is the cockpit configuration. I know at the time there was no mandatory GPWS but for such an airline a RADALT would not be to uncommon. Flight into smooth water also is a known danger (a colegue of mine managed this way to smash a helicoptor into the sea, it's not a good thing for ones curiculum)

C. F. I. T. in this case into water......

Skipping too many approaches in low weather at an airport when alternates are available is long held from this and similar.

I thought that the collision of United Flight 718 & TWA Flight 2 in 1956 was the reason for CVRs and flight data recorders. At least in the United States. By no means am I an expert in aviation history.

Too many attempts to land AND too much waiting to land time........Invites accidents.......Paul........Retired ATP

It's extremely dishonest to call it a ' Black box ' when it's orange. Shameful conduct. 😆

I think it was pilot error… Simple. They were not paying attention and killed everyone… When a pilot is irresponsible it's like murder basically… It still happens. One of the things that makes me think this is because there was no radio transmission. I'm assuming the radio was working I wonder if they checked what was left of it… Aviation crashes are still happening far too often thanks to negligence from pilots to mechanical to design itself. Far too often

Should have diverted to his alternate. Sounds like get-home-itis to me.

Interesting video but the final statement of merely asking people for their opinion on what may have happened is nothing short of being blatantly idiotic for want of a better description!! None of us watching this video can rightly base any assumption as to the reason of this tragedy unless we have had access to all the various & different facts & figures that are needed to even summise a possible scenario of what may have transpired.!! Its all mere & utter speculation & therefore not worthy of a tin of crap!! I'm presuming that there would have been a Court of Inqury & therefore any outcome as authorised by that said court is & can be the only legitimate explaination & sadly right or wrong!! The Mt Erebus (Air NZ, DC-10-30 (circa Nov. 1979) is a classic case whereby the Court of Inquiry probably got it wrong & where Air NZ top management lied through their bloody teeth!! That now famous statement by Judge Mahon of the Court of Inquiry whereby he uttered , An Orchestrated Litany of Lies was so spot on. (yeah right) Air NZ senior management inclusive of the then current NZ Prime Mister (otherwise known as "Piggy Muldoon") were rotten to the core & Morrie Davis did the best & only honourable thing that he could do which was to simply resign forthwith!! Muldoon was such an arsehole of a dog & one wouldn't waste the effort required to boot this mongrel right up his arse!! Air NZ tried to blame it on pilot error but it was & always will be Company Error in the form of probably incorrect way-points etc loaded into the comuter system etc, etc!! The Captains home soon after the accident was raided, nothing of financial value including money, jewellery etc was stolen but aviation orientated documents, air maps etc, etc were most definitly taken or probably stolen. Thieves normally look for financial rewards & don't usually steal air maps & the like as they have no real monetary value. I suspect this was a planned Air NZ inside job ordered by the Top Brass to cover their filthy arseholes!!

Trans AUSTRALIA Airlines not ‘Australian’.

R.I.P.💐🌹🌺