ASN logo
ASN Wikibase Occurrence # 144540
Last updated: 13 February 2020
This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information. If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can submit corrected information.

Type:Silhouette image of generic MD82 model; specific model in this crash may look slightly different
McDonnell Douglas MD-82
Owner/operator:SAS Scandinavian Airlines
Registration: SE-DFY
C/n / msn: 49438/1353
Fatalities:Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 3
Other fatalities:0
Aircraft damage: Minor
Location:Tarbes-Lourdes-Pyrénées Airport (LFBT) -   France
Phase: Take off
Departure airport:Tarbes-Lourdes-Pyrénées Airport (LFBT)
Destination airport:Oslo-Gardermoen Airport (OSL)
An MD-82 was long-term parked at the maintenance provider TARMAC at Tarbes-Pyrénées Airport in southern France. A ferry flight was planned by the operator SAS, from Tarbes to Oslo/Gardemoen. The intention during the flight was to perform a number of systems checks. The aircraft did a normal takeoff but during climb out the crew was contacted by ATC on the airport and informed that an object had been found on the right hand side of runway in the direction of takeoff. The crew had not noticed anything irregular during takeoff and the part found on the runway gave no clear indication of any identifiable part of the aircraft. The crew continued the flight with reduced speed and the systems checks were abandoned. ATC offered the crew help in the form of a visual inspection of the aircraft by the French air force. The French crew of the fighter plane could not observe any lost or missing panel/cover. The crew decided to continue the flight, but with a landing at Stockholm/Arlanda for better assistance if measures after the flight should be required. The aircraft landed on Arlanda and it was concluded that it was the right upper panel located between fin and vertical stabilizer that had separated.
A review of the maintenance supplier and its working procedures revealed that the type-rated engineer certifying the work performed before it was handed over to SAS did not follow the procedures outlined within the company. The subjected incident was the second on a short time period where opened panels had not been assembled in accordance with the type certificate holder’s maintenance instructions.


Revision history:

22-Mar-2012 05:57 harro Added

Corrections or additions? ... Edit this accident description