12th of November 2020, Standing Water, Blog #726
- V2Aviation
- Nov 12, 2025
- 2 min read
With a crew of two and sixteen passengers, a British Aerospace 3201 Jetstream 32EP was scheduled to operate a flight from Iquitos to Güeppi Airport, both in Peru. The flight was to be operated as a charter flight.
After completing the necessary flight preparations, the crew started both Honeywell TPE331-12UHR engines. A short while later, the crew received their taxi clearance to runway 24 at Coronel FAP Francisco Secada Vignetta International Airport.
This required entering the active runway, with a 180º turn at the end of the runway at the turning pad. While entering the runway, the crew noticed that part of the turning pad was flooded, caused by the recent (heavy) rain in the area. (Over the last 4 hours, 62.1 mm of rain had fallen in the area, which equates to 62,1 litres of rain per square meter)
The crew decided to continue as planned. The water was deeper than the crew anticipated, and when entering the turning pad, both propellers struck the water, causing damage to all propeller blades. After feeling abnormal vibrations and noticing fluctuating engine parameters, the crew shut down both engines.
An investigation was launched by the Comisión de Investigación de Accidentes de Aviación del Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones of Peru (CIAA). In the course of their investigation, the CIAA learned that a NOTAM had been issued warning flight crews of the flooded turning pad. The crew's reduced situational awareness, resulting from their complacency (the feeling that the flooding of the platform posed no risk), led them to fail to appreciate the magnitude of the flooding and the potential consequences of entering the turning pad.
The CIAA concluded that the probable cause of the double propstrike was;
“The crew's loss of situational awareness due to complacency led them to fail to appreciate the magnitude of the flooding and make the mistake of continuing to taxi to the flooded turnaround point at runway 24, resulting in the impact of both propeller blades against the water – Propeller Strike.”
The following contributing factors were identified;
The crew disregarded the NOTAM warning that the turnaround apron at runway 24 was flooded and that they should take the necessary precautions.
The airport infrastructure (stormwater drainage system) is a contributing factor to the Propeller Strike, as the drainage channel was unable to handle the amount of rainwater required to prevent flooding on the turnaround apron at runway 24.
The full investigation report (in Spanish), which served as the source for this blog, can be accessed by clicking on the .pdf file below.
** Editorial note **
V2 Aviation - Training & Maintenance has not been able to obtain an English-language investigation report for this accident. This blog is therefore based on several internet sources. Should there be inconsistencies in the blog, don't hesitate to get in touch with us. There are two possibilities to do that: via the comments function at the bottom of this page or via the contact page of the website.
Comments