Authority completes crash findings

Arthur Dovey flies his Yakovlev Yak 3 over Wanaka. Photo: Stephen Jaquiery.
Arthur Dovey flies his Yakovlev Yak 3 over Wanaka. Photo: Stephen Jaquiery.
It will be late this year or even next year before responsibility for the crash of a World War 2 fighter aircraft at last Easter’s Warbirds Over Wanaka International Airshow is decided by a judge in the High Court. The court action has been taken by former airline pilot Arthur Dovey who emerged from the cockpit uninjured, but is facing a $600,000 repair bill. Mark Price takes a look at the latest information on the crash of Yakovlev Yak 3M ZK-YYY.

The Warbirds Over Wanaka International Airshow last year celebrated 30 years since the first.

And it opened in spectacular fashion.

When the plan for a United States Air Force F-16 to fly past fell through, two Yak pilots agreed to step in.

The events that followed have been the subject of a Civil Aviation Authority investigation, and a copy of its seven-page report was provided this week.

It described the Yak display as a "simple high-speed pass" followed by a "buzz and break", which is a military term for deceleration from high speed to land with "minimum delay".

"Yak 1" landed on the sealed runway in front of the stand.

"Yak 2", piloted by Mr Dovey, landed on the grass next to it, and crashed into two cherry pickers positioned there.

The report began by noting Wanaka Airport was under the control of Warbirds Over Wanaka which appointed a flying display director (FDD) responsible for "the safe conduct of the flying display, approving any changes to the flying programme and running the morning mass briefing for all pilots and other participants".

Mr Dovey emerges unscathed from his badly damaged Yak. Photo: Stephen Jaquiery.
Mr Dovey emerges unscathed from his badly damaged Yak. Photo: Stephen Jaquiery.
According to "best practice" set out in a guide for airshow directors and referred to in the report, displays "must be carefully planned".

"The impromptu, ad hoc, unrehearsed or unplanned should never be attempted."

The report said the programme change was authorised by the flying display planner who advised the FDD, just before the briefing.

"No evidence was found of formal risk assessment of the programme change," the CAA report said.

Because military aircraft were involved in the show, there was also a military display director (MDD).

Before the briefing, he noticed the two cherry pickers, not scheduled to be in place until after the opening display, were on the grass next to the sealed runway.

On being informed, the FDD "told the manager responsible they were in the way and thought they should be moved.

"The manager said to leave it with him.

"Based on the discussion with the manager ... the FDD thought the cherry pickers were going to be removed."

The FDD, the report said, "reported at the morning briefing that the full width of the grass was available for take-off and landing."

Mr Dovey has previously told the ODT pilots were not made aware of the cherry pickers, and the report said "more than one pilot, including the pilot of Yak 2 [Mr Dovey] left the briefing with the very clear impression that the full width of the grass was available for landing".

The MDD told the CAA investigator, that having missed the part of the briefing about the availability of the grass runway, his "mental model" was that the Yaks would land on the sealed runway.

"The possibility that Yak 2 could be landing on the grass adjacent to the seal runway was not an option he had considered."

As the Yaks prepared to land he checked their wheels were down then turned his attention to an approaching helicopter, before hearing "a bang".

The report noted that from the control tower it was "almost impossible" to identify which runway a plane was lined up to land on.

Those in the tower did not hear Mr Dovey radio he was landing on the grass and as a result "no information about the cherry pickers" was passed to the pilot.

The nose-up, tail-down attitude of a Yak on landing precludes the pilot from having any forward vision.

The report concluded by saying CAA was working with show organisers to further develop and improve risk mitigation strategies.

As well, pilots had been reminded "a heightened level of vigilance" was required at airshows.

"Within the limits imposed by visibility and operational requirements, runways should be actively scanned for unexpected obstacles before land."

In an email, Mr Dovey said the report confirmed the accident was "caused by a combination of errors by NZDF and WoW personnel".

"One important issue that was raised was the wisdom of allowing non-professionals to provide display direction services to display pilots.

"It is perhaps unsurprising that no mention of that is made in the CAA report because the CAA had given WoW permission to use non-professionals for that purpose."

Mr Dovey has made a claim against both Warbirds over Wanaka Airshows Ltd, owned by the Warbirds Over Wanaka Community Trust, and the New Zealand Defence Force.

Warbirds general manager Ed Taylor has previously said Mr Dovey's claim would be defended.

Of the CAA report, Mr Taylor said this week it did not apportion responsibility.

"Warbirds is reviewing the findings and there are aspects of the report that are inaccurate.

"However, the matter is before the courts and Warbirds has no further comment at this time."

Add a Comment

 

Advertisement