DC-6 crash near Lo Valdes

Douglas DC-6B with serial number 45513 and serial 1004 entered the airline from the factory on August 21, 1958 as part of a batch of four aircraft ^[1] . Initially, he received the tail number CC-CLDD, but in 1959, after re-registration, the number changed to CC-CCG ^[2] . The total operating time of the airliner was 17,085 flight hours, including 27 flight hours from the last periodic repair. Weight and alignment were within acceptable limits. The type of fuel was not indicated in the report ^[3] .

The crew of the aircraft consisted of 7 people ^{[3] [1]} :

• The aircraft commander is Mario Bustamante Astete ( Spanish Mario Bustamante Astete ). A total flight time of 10,868 hours on various types of aircraft, including the DC-6B. Andes crossed 24 times as a commander and 102 times as a co-pilot.
• The co - pilot is Patricio Rojas Vender ( Spanish Patricio Rojas Vender ). A total flying time of 2604 hours on various types of aircraft, including DC-6B. Andes crossed 16 times as a co-pilot.
• Flight Engineer - Dalmiro Jaramillo ( Spanish: Dalmiro Jaramillo G. )
• Beadradist - José Ramirez Zuniga ( Spanish: José Ramírez Zúñiga )
• Senior Steward - Marcos Hassard Belsar
• Stewardesses :
  • Miriam Concha Figueroa ( Spanish: Myriam Concha Figueroa )
  • Sonia Yebra Fernández ( Spanish: Sonia Yebra Fernández )

The aircraft performed scheduled passenger flight 107 from Santiago (Chile) to Montevideo (Uruguay) with an intermediate landing in Buenos Aires (Argentina). According to the flight plan, during the first stage, the airliner was supposed to perform a visual flight along the route: Santiago ( Los Serrillos airport ) - Melipiglia - Maipo - San Rafael - Winka Renanko - Junin - Suipacha - Buenos Aires ( Ezeiza Airport ) . In this case, to Maypo, the flight height was to be 19 thousand feet (5.8 km), and after that - 19.8 thousand feet (6 km). At 08:06 with 7 crew members and 80 passengers (59 Chileans and 21 residents of other countries) on board, flight 107 flew north towards Santiago, after which it flew at a low altitude above the city near San Cristobal , and at 08 : 10–08: 12 is already near Mankühue (it is erroneously indicated in the report as Markuehue ). At 08:17, the crew contacted the control center in Panagra and requested permission to straighten the route along the Amarillo - Tumuyan -Viejo- Reynolds section at an altitude of 5700 meters. The dispatcher allowed rectification of the route, while asking the estimated time to reach Amarillo , to which the crew reported that 08:36. At 08:22, the radio was completed. The airliner continued to follow at a low altitude relative to the surrounding area, thus passing Farellones , Lagunillas , Cueltequay and Lo Valdes . Then at 08:36 a few witnesses saw how the airliner crashed near the San Jose volcano on the ridge connecting the mountains of Catedral and Corona. Douglas crashed into cliffs at an altitude of 3,658 meters ( 12,001 feet) and was only 100 meters below the top and completely collapsed, with all 87 people on board killed ^{[4] [1]} .

At that time, it was the largest disaster of the Douglas DC-6 aircraft, until in 1969 the catastrophe near Athens pushed it to second place (90 dead). It also remains (in 2019) the largest plane crash in the history of Chile ^[5] .

The plane collapsed into small parts, while determining the position of the controls at the time of the crash was impossible. After examining the most surviving engines No. 1 and 2 (on the left wing), it was found that both of them at the time of the impact worked with a shaft speed of 2400 rpm, and their propellers were not feathery . Based on these data, it was concluded that there were no technical failures ^[6] .

The flight plan issued to the crew was approved in accordance with national and international standards, but the commander decided to straighten the route, although the chosen option contradicted the directives and instructions of the airline, as well as the flight plan ^[6] .

Conclusions ^{[6] [7]}

• The crew was duly certified and qualified.
• The aircraft had a valid certificate of airworthiness.
• The flight plan was compiled in accordance with national and international standards.
• Weather conditions were not the cause of the disaster.
• At the time of the collision, the engines were running.
• There were no technical failures or structural damage during the flight.
• The crew commander performed a flight in violation of the directives and guidelines of the airline, as well as the approved flight plan.

The commission called the cause of the disaster the lack of discipline of the crew commander, who violated the flight plan and flight requirements in mountainous areas ^[7] .

• ICAO Circular 88-AN / 74 (English) (link not available) . International Civil Aviation Organization (December 1968). Date of treatment August 26, 2014. Archived on August 26, 2014.