KUALA LUMPUR: The preliminary report on the Kapar air crash on Feb 13 found that irregular maintenance activities had been performed on the aircraft.
The report, published today by the Air Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), also found that the aircraft's actual take-off weight had exceeded the maximum take-off weight limitation.
Evidence suggested that irregular maintenance procedures were conducted on the BK 160TR (I-POOC), involving the use of uncertified or non-compliant aircraft components.
Furthermore, unauthorised maintenance entities or individuals lacking proper qualifications were involved in servicing the aircraft. Such practices could potentially compromise safety and may contravene aviation regulations.
"This includes the removal of the aircraft's nose landing gear (NLG) and installation of a new NLG in February this year by unauthorised maintenance personnel or persons who were not appropriately qualified.
"Installation of the new NLG was completed just prior to the accident flight on Feb 13 and the apparent purpose of the flight was to test the newly installed NLG."
"There was also the installation of a non-certified 'tie-down ring' part beneath each wing of the aircraft situated in proximity to the main landing gear wheel well.
"These components were installed by bolting them onto the joint where the wing fitting meets the main spar, penetrating through the composite material skin of the wing."
The report also said that routine maintenance activities had been performed on the aircraft by unauthorised and unqualified maintenance personnel, such as the replacement of sparks plugs and air filter elements as well as other servicing works that were conducted at the end of Nov 2023.
"There is a high likelihood that there were other irregular maintenance works, based on the entries in the maintenance log kept by the late pilot."
However, the report said the investigation report on the maintenance practices of this aircraft will be updated as further evidence is being made available.
On the aircraft's actual take-off weight exceeding it's maximum take-off weight limitation, the report said: "There is evidence that the BK 160TR (I-POOC) had exceeded the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft, which is 850 kg, during the accident flight on Feb 13. The approximate take-off weight on that day was 921.3kg.
"Presuming that there was no luggage taken on board, and no significant change to the weight of either the pilot or passenger since the time that their weights were recorded (there is no evidence to suggest so), the aircraft's actual total weight had exceeded the maximum take-off weight limitation by approximately 8.4 per cent for the accident flight."
It added that the BK 160TR is a relatively weight-sensitive aircraft, and based on evidence, there is a high probability that there were other flights flown by the late pilot previously that had also exceeded the limitation of the aircraft's operating weight.
"The probable flights that might have exceeded weight limitation are the long sectors flown during the overseas trips to Myanmar, the Philippines and Thailand that had two persons on board (POB) and heavy fuel loads.
"There may also be other local flights that had exceeded weight limitation (2 POB and heavy fuel loads), just like the flight on Feb 13. However, further evidence is being gathered to determine the number of such occurrences."