CEN10IA084

NTSB incident investigation · ATR ATR72 · Dallas, TX · December 26, 2009

Incident · No injuriesIncident investigationFinal report
Date
December 25, 2009, 20:00 local (Dec 26, 2009, 02:00 UTC)
Place
Dallas, TX
Injuries
45 uninjured
Damage
Minor damage
Phase of flight
Enroute
Aircraft
N494AEATR ATR72
Defining event
Enroute-descent: Flight control sys malf/fail
Weather
Visual (VMC) · Night
Status
Completed · report March 28, 2012
Report
Approved by Office Director
NTSB office
Central Region
Parties
Executive Airlines, Inc., FAA AVP-100, Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses, ATR North America, Air Line Pilots Association, Int'l
Case key
75207

From the NTSB’s public API. By law, NTSB reports can’t be used as evidence in lawsuits over the incident.

On this page

Probable cause

A fatigue failure of an elevator stop bracket, which resulted in a partial jam of the elevator control. Contributing to the failure was the improper installation of shim stacks, poor alignment of the brackets, and cyclic stresses acting on the lower stop, generated by the repeated improper use of the gust lock system.

Findings · 5

NTSB’s coded findings. Those marked are part of the probable cause; the rest are factors or other findings. Under each, the cases with the same finding.

Empennage structure: elevatorsAircraft › Aircraft structures · Fatigue/wear/corrosionAerospatiale ATR 72-212A: 1 caseAll aircraft: 6 casesProbable cause
Empennage structure: elevator/tab attach fittingAircraft › Aircraft structures · Incorrect service/maintenanceAerospatiale ATR 72-212A: 1 caseAll aircraft: 3 casesProbable cause
Empennage structure: elevator/tab attach fittingAircraft › Aircraft structures · Unintentional use/operationAerospatiale ATR 72-212A: 1 caseAll aircraft: 3 casesProbable cause
Action: lack of actionPersonnel issues › Action/decision · Not specifiedAerospatiale ATR 72-212A: 1 caseAll aircraft: 792 casesProbable cause

Sequence of events

The events NTSB coded, in order, by phase of flight. The defining event is the one that best describes the accident. Under each, the cases with the same event anywhere in their sequence.

Analysis

The flight crew reported that, while in level flight, they discovered that both control columns were jammed and they could only move the control column fore and aft a maximum of about 1 inch. After running checklist procedures without success, the flight crew slowed the airplane to 180 knots and were able to regain full control of the elevator. On final approach and after configuring for landing, the elevators again seemed to be jammed. The flight crew conducted a go-around and declared an emergency. During the second approach, with both control columns partially jammed, the flight crew performed a shallow approach to a smooth landing. A postincident examination revealed that brackets holding an elevator stop had fractured, causing the elevator movement to partially jam. The fractures were consistent with fatigue failure and were caused by a combination of improperly installed shim stacks, poor alignment of the L-brackets, and cyclic stresses acting on the lower stop, which were generated by the repeated improper use of the gust lock system.

Factual narrative

On December 25, 2009, approximately 2000 central standard time, an Aerospatiale ATR 72-212A airplane, N494AE, operated by Executive Airlines, Inc. as Eagle Flight 4756, experienced a flight control system malfunction while en route to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (KDFW) Dallas, Texas. The two flight crew members, two flight attendants, and 41 passengers were not injured. The domestic passenger flight was being operated under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121, on an instrument flight rules flight plan. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the incident. The flight originated from the Midland International Airport (KMAF), Midland, Texas, at 1827. While in level flight, with the autopilot on, the flight crew received a pitch mistrim message. In accordance with check list procedures they disconnected the autopilot and discovered that fore and aft movement of both control columns was stiff with limited travel and did not feel normal. They could move the elevator controls a maximum 1 inch pitch up and pitch down. The flight crew twice attempted the Jammed Elevator procedure in an effort to uncouple the elevators. Despite their attempts they did not succeed in uncoupling the elevators. While coordinating with their company’s maintenance operational control they slowed the airplane to 180 knots and found that they had regained increased control of the elevator. On a final approach and after configuring for landing, the elevators again felt jammed. The flight crew conducted a go-around and declared an emergency. During the second landing attempt the flight crew still had both control columns partially jammed. They performed a shallow approach to a smooth landing. While taxing to the gate, they noted the elevators were still jammed. After parking, with engines shutdown, the flight crew regained full control of elevator. An after landing inspection by company maintenance personnel found the brackets holding the left elevator down limit stop had fractured and separated from the hinge fittings and the separated down limit stop was restricting movement of the left elevator. The left elevator hinge assembly and pitch uncoupling mechanism (PUM) disconnect switch were removed from the airplane and sent to the National Transportation Safety Board Materials Laboratory for further examination. The inboard and outboard L-brackets that attached the lower stop to the hinge fitting were fractured. The inboard L-bracket was fractured at the bend. The outboard bracket was rotated approximately 90 degrees with respect to the stop and had fractured near the nut plate. The lower stop shim stack was subjected to deformation and tearing. The shim stack was composed of four layers. Starting from the face of the stack in contact with the hinge fitting / L-brackets and progressing toward the stop, the layer sequence was laminated shims, solid shim, laminated shims, and laminated shims. The total shim stack thicknesswas 0.15 inch (3.8 mm). The maximum allowed shim stack thickness was 0.062 inch (1.6 mm). The shim stack specification called for a solid shim 0.030 inch with a 0.032 inch maximum stack of laminated shims. A section of the laminated shim layer in contact with the hinge fitting was missing. The adjacent solid shim was deformed and torn. The laminates in the two remaining layers were deformed and layers were splayed apart between the brackets. Features on the inboard L-bracket fracture surface were consistent with high-cycle fatigue initiating from the inner bend and progressing to the outer bend. While much of the fracture surface was damaged or covered with debris, isolated regions showed features consistent with fatigue striations. Higher magnification examination illustrated curved striations consistent with fatigue. The curvature of the striations was consistent with the crack originating at the inner bend. The size of the fatigue region and the direction of crack propagation were consistent with high-cycle unidirectional bending fatigue. The positioning of the L-brackets with respect to the support flanges on the hinge fitting was examined by reattaching the L-brackets with clekos and using a straight edge to inspect for gaps. The inboard bracket was slightly proud of the hinge fitting resulting in a gap between the straight edge and the support flange. The outboard lower stop bracket did not protrude below the support flanges. The alignment of the inboard bracket could not be reliably determined because of the fracture. The PUM disconnect switch was stuck in the closed position when received by the Materials Laboratory. The closed position is the normal state of the switch when the left and right elevators are coupled. When the PUM is disconnected, the elevators are uncoupled, the switch opens, and a cockpit alert indicator is illuminated. The continuity of the PUM disconnect switch leads were tested with a multimeter. The six switch leads were labeled alphabetically from A to F. Electrical continuity was detected between leads B and C and between leads E and F. This pattern was consistent with the switch being stuck in the closed position. The unit was not further examined and the reason for the switch failure could not be determined. Normal procedures in the flight manual for the preliminary cockpit preparation and parking require confirmation that the gust lock is engaged. The procedures specify that the gust lock must be released during the before takeoff checks and the gust lock must be engaged after landing. The operator’s procedures caution that the gust lock must be engaged when the airplane is moving on the surface or when parked unattended. There are additional instructions to confirm that the gust lock is engaged prior to taxi or when leaving the aircraft. A review of data from the flight data recorder (FDR) from the incident airplane showed several events when the elevators were in a position consistent with the gust lock beingproperly engaged before takeoff and after landing. Of the 92 total flights recorded, the FDR data showed the elevators were in a position consistent with the gust lock being properly engaged before takeoff and after landing on about 9 of those flights. The FDR data also showed numerous events, including taxi time, on the remaining flights when the elevators were in contact with the lower stops. This position is consistent with the gust lock not being properly engaged. Therefore the elevators were allowed to slam against the lower stops. This condition would allow the generation of repeated stress on the elevator stops and the brackets holding those stops. On July 30, 2010, the operator issued a Safety Alert Bulletin Alert 2010-005 “Topic: Elevator Gust Lock – Flight Crews and Mechanics” reminding them of the operator’s gust lock engagement procedures. On July 1, 2010, the European Safety Agency (EASA) issued Airworthiness Directive AD 2010-0138 mandating an inspection of all ATR-42 and ATR-72 airplanes in the worldwide fleet. Effective on December 15, 2011, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued Airworthiness Directive FAA-2011-0721 mandating an inspection of all ATR-42 and ATR-72 airplanes.

Aircraft

Registration
N494AE
Reported as
ATR ATR72 (212A)
Category
Airplane
Serial number
494
Airframe hours
20,915
Engines
Pratt And Whitney PW127, 2,880 horsepower, turbo propPratt And Whitney PW127, 2,880 horsepower, turbo prop
Damage
Minor damage
Flight
Part 121
Operator
Executive Airlines Inc, doing business as American Eagle
Registered owner
Wells Fargo Bank Northwest Na Trustee
Airworthiness certificate
Standard, Transport
Last inspection
Continuous airworthiness · September 11, 2009
Departed
KMAF · Midland, TX
Destination
KDFW · Dallas, TX
Flight plan
IFR
Airport
KDFW · Dallas/Fort Worth Internationa, runway 36R, 13,400 × 200 ft, concrete

Matched to the registry by N-number and the event date; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

Flight crew · 2

As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names.

Role
Pilot
Age
39
Injuries
None
Certificate
Airline transport
Airplane ratings
Multi-engine land
Instrument ratings
Airplane
Medical
Class 1, With waivers/limitations
Last flight review
July 15, 2009
Seat
Left
Flight hours
10,585 total · 268 in this make and model
Role
Co-pilot
Age
24
Injuries
None
Certificate
Commercial
Airplane ratings
Multi-engine land
Instrument ratings
Airplane
Medical
Class 1
Last flight review
July 17, 2009
Seat
Right
Flight hours
1,930 total · 1,204 in this make and model

Weather

Conditions
Visual (VMC) · Night
Wind
Calm
Visibility
10 statute miles
Lowest ceiling
None
Temperature
32 °F, dew point 18 °F
Altimeter
30.04 inHg
Observed at
KDFW

Docket · 25

The files NTSB released with the investigation on December 22, 2011, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 31.0 MB in all.

Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 - received 12-30-2009Item 1 · .PDF · 1.3 MBPilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 - received 1-8-2010Item 2 · .PDF · 312 KBCrewmember Interview - CaptainItem 3 · .PDF · 10 KBCrewmember Inverview - First OfficerItem 4 · .PDF · 10 KBDispatchers StatementItem 5 · .PDF · 10 KBAirport - KDFW ILS or LOC Runway 36LItem 6 · .PDF · 501 KBManufacturer's Flight Manual Requirements for Engagement of the Gust LockItem 7 · .PDF · 190 KBOperator's Aircraft Operating Manual (AOM) Description of the Gust LockItem 8 · .PDF · 37 KBOperator's "HI6 Message" Sent to All PilotsItem 9 · .PDF · 71 KBOperator's Safety Bulletin Alert 2010-05 (with 2 embedded photos)Item 10 · .PDF · 94 KBFederal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airworthiness Directive 2010-NM-AD for all ATR 42 and 72 AirplanesItem 11 · .PDF · 68 KBEuropean Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Airworthiness Directive 2010-0138 for all ATR 42 and 72 AirplanesItem 12 · .PDF · 28 KBMaterials Laboratory Factual Report 10-056 (With 22 Embedded Photos)Item 13 · .PDF · 22 photos · 3.9 MBATC 3 - Attachment 1 - ATC Summary of EventItem 14 · .PDF · 43 KBATC 3 - Attachment 2 - ATCT Tower LogItem 15 · .PDF · 24 KBATC 3 - Attachment 3 - FAA Form 8020-9, ATC Incident Preliminary NoticeItem 16 · .PDF · 75 KBATC 3 - Attachment 4 - ATC Quality Assurance ReviewItem 17 · .PDF · 21 KBATC 3 - ATC Specialist ReportItem 18 · .PDF · 83 KBFlight Data Recorder 10 - Specialist's Factual ReportItem 19 · .PDF · 674 KBFlight Data Recorder 10 - Attachment 1 (FDR tabular data for figures 1 to 24)Item 20 · .CSV · 14.9 MBFlight Data Recorder 10 - Attachment 2 (FDR tabular data for figures 25 to 32; file is zipped)Item 21 · ZIP · 8.5 MBPhoto of N494AE (Internet Photo from www.flickr.com)Item 22 · .PDF · 75 KBStatement of Party Representatives to NTSB InvestigationItem 23 · .PDF · 33 KBRelease of Aircraft Wreckage, NTSB Form 6120.15Item 24 · .PDF · 24 KBCockpit Voice Recorder 12 - Summary Factual Report of InvestigationItem 25 · .PDF · 41 KB