Within a month of occurrence of the fatal crash, the Transportation Safety Board (JST) of Argentina has published the Preliminary Report of the accident that involved a Bombardier Challenger 300 aircraft, at the San Fernando International Airport, Province of Buenos Aires.
On December 18, a private plane went off the road and caught fire on the runway at San Fernando Airport in the province of Buenos Aires, resulting in two fatalities. This Friday, the Government published the Preliminary Report of the accident.
The Preliminary Report was prepared within the time limits established by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation and is based on information collected by the technical team of the National Directorate for the Investigation of Aeronautical Incidents of the JST .
The Agency made available all the human and technical resources necessary for the development of the investigation.
The report is about the "runway excursion" of the Bombardier Challenger 300, registration LV-GOK, which occurred at 16:19 on that December day. One of the most important points is that, after 35 minutes of flight, the Challenger 300 operated by the company New Lines showed anomalous behavior at the time of landing.
The JST report showed a graph compiling "the approach paths of the last 10 flights recorded landing on runway 05 at San Fernando International Airport before the accident."
According to the JST report,
"the aircraft's excursion off the runway caused the airport's perimeter fences to break and a private car located on the street parallel to the fences to be completely destroyed . The fire generated in the aircraft after the impact affected a series of homes located in the area of the aircraft's final position."
"Due to the risk of collapse caused by the structural damage resulting from the fire, the Civil Defense of the Municipality of San Fernando proceeded with the demolition of one of the homes ."
The final position of the aircraft was 230 meters from the end of the runway and approximately 30 meters beyond the airport perimeter fence.
According to the report, it took the firefighters 2 minutes and 38 seconds to reach the runway off-ramp area. At 4 minutes and 37 seconds, the fire began to be extinguished, although the jet of extinguishing agent did not reach the fuselage of the plane.
According to the fire department,
"At the time of the incident, the airport had a category 520 firefighting capacity, with a 6,000-litre water pump, 725 litres of foam and 180 kilos of dry chemical powder. According to the information provided, two fire trucks were operational and fully loaded at the time."
In the area designated for the Rescue and Firefighting Service ( SSEI ) , the presence of unused aircraft was observed that hindered the rapid transit of fire trucks. These aircraft were not anchored to the ground and several did not have parking wedges.
The ambulance arrived at 5 minutes and 23 after the start of the event. At 9 minutes and 8 seconds, the fire truck finally managed to direct a jet of fire towards the central area of the fuselage.
In the report, it was noted that on October 28, 2024, the Argentine Federal Police (PFA) notified the National Civil Aviation Administration (ANAC) through an official communication about the presence of these aircraft that hinder the rapid action of the fire brigade.
According to interviews with fire personnel, the water refueling connection did not have sufficient pressure to perform a rapid charge of the tanks, a situation that is under investigation. In addition, the rapid-load foam hopper required personnel to access the roof of the vehicle, which did not have guardrails, and did not have a ladder to facilitate rapid access.
Furthermore, from the time the aircraft began the runway excursion (+0:00) until the ARFF and support fire engines transited taxiway Charlie, 2 minutes and 38 seconds elapsed (+2:38).
The report also notes that
"the perimeter of the platform in the direction of the runway was delimited by an open drainage ditch." According to testimony from firefighters, "none of the operational vehicles had sufficient wading capacity to overcome this ditch in the event of an emergency."
The conclusion drawn is consistent with the preliminary hypotheses tested in the hours following the incident: "The trajectory of the accident flight (in yellow) showed significant differences compared to previous approaches."
The analysis of the flight data is currently under investigation, pending the reading and evaluation of the information recorded by the FDR. In addition, recordings made from a private hangar were obtained that may shed more light on the accident.
The Forward Fuselage and the Cockpit Door
The front section of the plane remained intact, as seen in photographs and videos circulated hours after the plane crash. The JST report confirms that this area maintained "its structural integrity" even after the fire was extinguished.
The cockpit door was "closed and facing upward at a 45-degree angle." The right windshield had damage "which, according to interviews with rescue personnel, was a result of the rescue efforts."
The door, meanwhile, "showed signs of activation of the opening mechanism; however, in interviews with rescue personnel, it was not possible to determine who activated it or when."
Finally, the aircraft had an emergency exit located in the middle section of the passenger cabin. However, this area was completely destroyed by the fire.
The Preliminary Report, issued by the Transportation Safety Board (JST), was prepared within the time limits established by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation and, has information collected by the technical team of the National Directorate of Investigation of Aeronautical Incidents of the JST, according to the authorities.
They assured that "the Agency made available all the human and technical resources necessary for the development of the investigation."
They also explained the importance of emphasizing that the document presents
"preliminary findings, subject to modifications as the investigation progresses. The analysis, conclusions and operational safety recommendations will only be published in the Operational Safety Report."
"In accordance with Law 27,514, the JST's mission is to contribute to transport safety through independent investigation of accidents and the issuance of recommendations. In this regard, the JST is the enforcement authority of Annex 13 and, as such, has the mission of investigating aeronautical accidents and incidents at the national level," they added.
Preliminary report conclusion was :
"The JST investigation is strictly technical in nature. Its conclusions do not generate any presumption of guilt or administrative, civil or criminal liability for the facts under investigation."
