Investigation Summary
The flight was operating the fourth leg of a six-sector schedule in West Papua. As the aircraft approached Kaimana, weather conditions were deteriorating, with visibility dropping to 2 kilometers in moderate rain and cumulonimbus clouds in the vicinity. Despite these conditions, which were below the minimums for a visual approach, the crew elected to continue. The Captain, highly experienced on Fokker aircraft but with less than 200 hours on the Xian MA60, failed to conduct a proper approach briefing or complete the landing checklist. During the final stages of the approach, the crew disengaged the autopilot at 960 feet and continued to search for the runway. At 376 feet, having failed to establish visual contact, they initiated a go-around. During this maneuver, the Captain deviated from standard procedures by retracting the flaps from 15 degrees to 0 degrees almost immediately while simultaneously banking the aircraft up to 38 degrees to the left. The combination of high bank angle, flap retraction, and engine torque caused a rapid loss of lift and a descent rate of 3,000 feet per minute, leading to impact with the shallow sea.
Final Conclusions
The NTSC concluded the primary cause was the crew's decision to fly a visual approach in unsuitable weather conditions and their subsequent failure to follow standard operating procedures during the go-around. Contributing factors included a lack of situational awareness, low experience on the MA60 type for both pilots, and inadequacies in the airline's training program which allowed for 'regression' to procedures used on previous aircraft types. The investigation also highlighted that the Captain's rapid retraction of flaps during a high-angle turn at low altitude directly led to the aerodynamic stall and impact.
Photographic Evidence (1)
Video Analysis
On Wings of Fraud: The crash of Merpati Nusantara Airlines flight 8968 — A detailed analysis of the Merpati 8968 crash, exploring the pilot errors, the controversial acquisition of the Xian MA60, and the systemic failures within the airline.
If playback is blocked, the owner has disabled embedding — use the link above.
Airframe & Maintenance
Crew Experience
Captain
55 years old; previously flew Fokker F100.
First Officer
36 years old; joined Merpati in 2007.
Systems & Failure Modes
Flap Control System
The crew retracted flaps from 15 to 0 degrees during the go-around, which significantly reduced lift at a critical low-altitude phase.
GPWS
The Ground Proximity Warning System issued a 'minimums' alert during the approach, which the crew ignored while attempting to find the runway.
Interesting Facts
- 01The aircraft was a Xian MA60, a Chinese-built turboprop based on the Antonov An-24 design.
- 02The aircraft (MSN 0603) was manufactured in 2007, stored at the factory, and delivered to Merpati in December 2010.
- 03The Captain had over 24,000 total flight hours but only 199 hours on the MA60.
- 04The First Officer had only 370 total flight hours, with 234 hours on the MA60.
- 05Visibility at the time of the crash was 2 km, which is below the minimum required for a visual approach.
- 06The aircraft hit the water at a high bank angle with flaps fully retracted.
- 07The wreckage was found in shallow water at a depth of approximately 15 meters.
Safety Actions & Advisories
Training Review
NTSC ordered Merpati Nusantara to review its training management system to prevent pilots from regressing to procedures of previous aircraft types.
Manual Revisions
Xian Aircraft revised the flight operation and aircraft maintenance manuals following the accident investigation.
Known Controversies & Unanswered Questions
MA60 Procurement and Certification
Reference ↗The purchase of the Xian MA60 was heavily criticized in the Indonesian parliament due to the aircraft's lack of FAA certification and allegations of corruption regarding the procurement process.