text
stringlengths 0
3.21k
|
|---|
He stated that the pilot routinely flew the accident airplane to nearby airports to conduct touch-and-go takeoffs and landings. |
The owner reported that he assisted the pilot with the preflight inspection before the accident flight; they topped off the fuel tank with 12 gallons of fuel, then the owner "hand propped" the engine with the pilot in the cockpit and watched him depart the airport traffic pattern to the east. |
During takeoff and climb, the engine sounded "good and solid." Witnesses near the accident site stated that they heard the airplane's engine power increasing and decreasing. |
One witness stated that the airplane descended to about 100 ft above ground level, just above the treetops, when the wings started to rock back and forth. |
The airplane then made a left turn to the south, immediately rolled left and descended steeply until impact. |
An additional witness stated that he heard a "backfire" as the airplane was descending. |
The pilot had completed the requirements of BasicMed on June 19, 2018. |
The pilot's logbooks showed a total of 16 hours in the accident airplane make and model as of the last entry recorded on September 23, 2018, with 4.6 hours and 7.1 hours in the previous 30 and 90 days, respectively. |
According to FAA airworthiness and airplane maintenance records, the airplane was issued a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category on September 20, 2008. |
It was a single place, open cockpit, low wing, tailwheel-equipped airplane constructed of wood and fabric. |
According to the airplane logbooks, during the last condition inspection on April 26, 2018, the left exhaust stack was repaired with welding; no additional mechanical irregularities were noted during the inspection. |
Review of the FAA SAIB CE-09-35 "Carburetor Icing Prevention" chart showed a potential for serious icing at glide power settings for the conditions near the time of the accident. |
The airplane debris path was confined to an area immediately adjacent to the wreckage near 50-ft-tall trees. |
There were several fresh broken branches in nearby trees. |
The airplane collided with trees and impacted level terrain on a heading of about 120°. |
The site was located about 500 ft north of a 2-lane highway, about 1,400 ft east of a county road, and 1,000 ft west of a farm pasture. |
All primary structural components and flight control surfaces were accounted for in the debris field. |
The cockpit was crushed, but the pilot's four-point harness remained intact. |
The magneto switch was in the left magneto position and the key was bent at a 90° angle. |
The throttle control lever was in the out (idle) position and the carburetor heat and engine primer were in the forward (off) position. |
The engine remained attached to the firewall, which was separated from the fuselage and was partially imbedded in the ground. |
Both wings separated from the fuselage at impact but remained partially attached by tension wires and control cables. |
The tail section, including the rudder and elevator, remained attached and showed little damage. |
Control continuity was established from the rudder, elevator, and ailerons to their respective cockpit controls; there was no evidence of any preimpact failures or malfunctions. |
One propeller blade was partially fractured about 12 inches from the hub. |
There was minimal rotational scoring and no evidence of leading edge gouging. |
The opposing blade remained attached to the hub and was intact. |
Examination of the engine revealed that oil was present in the rocker boxes and the galleries. |
Thumb compression and suction on all cylinders was confirmed with the top spark plugs removed through 720° when the engine was rotated at the propeller hub. |
All valves, pushrods, and springs operated normally, and the rotation was smooth with no anomalies noted. |
The pistons appeared well-lubricated and there was no interior engine damage observed. |
The spark plugs were examined and appeared to have minimal wear when compared to the Champion Check-A-Plug chart. |
The left magneto was not damaged and produced spark from all terminals. |
The right magneto was damaged by impact forces. |
The gascolator and its filter were damaged by impact forces and devoid of fuel, but had an odor consistent with 100 low-lead aviation fuel; the fuel filter screen was free of debris. |
The carburetor was impact damaged near the air intake and throttle disk, but the internal components remained intact; the brass float, plunger, and damper remained in their respective locations and did not appear to be damaged. |
The fuel line leading to the carburetor contained residual fuel. |
The 12-gallon fuel tank, which was mounted on the firewall, was breached during the impact and contained about 2 gallons of fuel. |
A water-finding paste was used to test the fuel and it did not reveal the presence of water. |
The Office of Medical Examiner, District One, Florida, performed the autopsy on the pilot and determined that the manner of death was multiple blunt traumatic injuries. |
Toxicological testing performed on specimens from the pilot by the Federal Aviation Administration Forensic Sciences Laboratory was negative for carbon monoxide, drugs, and ethanol. |
During a corporate flight, as the pilots climbed the airplane to flight level 180, both electrical generators failed and would not reset. |
The pilots attempted to troubleshoot the problem but could not regain electrical power. |
The airplane's battery power was rapidly deteriorating, so the pilots declared an emergency and diverted to the nearest airport. |
Due to the loss of electrical power, the pilots lost communications and had to manually extend the landing gear. |
They could not verify, with air traffic control tower personnel, if the landing and nose gear were extended and locked. |
The pilots made a forced landing with the nose landing gear not fully extended, causing the airplane to skid on the forward fuselage after touchdown and substantially damaging the engines. |
Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed the right generator current limiter had failed. |
A mechanic connected a battery to the airplane, and the left propeller immediately began to rotate. |
The mechanic determined that there was uncommanded voltage to the left starter, which was caused by a failure of the left starter relay when the engine was started before the flight. |
During the flight, the right generator was managing all of the airplane's electrical load, the cumulative electrical load exceeded the capacity of the right generator current limiter, and the generator failed. |
At that point, the airplane's electrical load was only being supplied by battery power, which was quickly depleted. |
Postaccident examination of the nose landing gear did not identify a mechanical reason to explain why the nose landing gear did not extend during the pilots' emergency landing gear extension procedure. |
The failure of the left starter relay during engine start, which resulted in a loss of electrical and battery power during the flight and led to a forced landing with the nose landing gear not fully extended, causing substantial damage to the engines. |
On January 19, 2018, about 1630 central standard time, a Swearingen SA227-TT airplane, N6UP, had an electrical malfunction during climb, and the flight crew executed a forced landing to Ellington Airport (EFD), Houston, Texas. |
The two pilots and two passengers were not injured, and the airplane sustained substantial damage to both engines during landing. |
The airplane was registered to and operated by AIRCO JN LLC, Freedom, Oklahoma, as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 corporate flight. |
Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident, and an instrument flight rules flight plan had been filed. |
The flight departed Beaumont, Texas, at 1515, and was destined for Uvalde, Texas. |
According to the pilots, during climb about 18,000 ft, both generators failed and would not reset. |
The pilots attempted to troubleshoot the problem and could not regain electrical power. |
The battery power was rapidly deteriorating so the pilots declared an emergency and diverted to EFD as the nearest airport. |
Due to the loss of electrical power, the pilots lost communications and also had to manually extended the landing gear. |
They could not verify if all the landing gear were extended and locked with the control tower personnel. |
During the forced landing, the nose landing gear was retracted, and the airplane skidded on the forward fuselage after touchdown. |
Due to the nose gear being retracted during the landing, both propeller assemblies and engines sustained substantial damage. |
Examination of the airplane by Federal Aviation Administration inspectors and a mechanic revealed the right generator current limiter was failed (blown). |
The mechanic connected a battery to the airplane and the left propeller immediately began to rotate. |
After troubleshooting, the mechanic determined there was uncommanded voltage to the left starter which was caused by the left starter relay that failed at the engine start prior to the flight. |
During the flight, the right generator was managing all the airplane's electrical load, and the cumulative electrical load exceeded the capacity of the right generator current limiter and it failed. |
At that point, the airplane electrical load was only being supplied by battery power. |
According to the mechanic, on January 2, 2018, the emergency landing gear extension was successfully tested during the airplane's most recent inspection. |
During the postaccident examination, a mechanical reason for the nose landing gear not extending during the pilots' emergency landing gear extension procedure could not be determined. |
HISTORY OF FLIGHT On April 5, 2021, about 0950 central daylight time, a Piper PA-23-250, N5018Y, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Springfield, Tennessee. |
The flight instructor and the commercial-rated pilot receiving instruction were seriously injured. |
The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. |
The purpose of the flight was to conduct multi-engine training in the twin-engine airplane. |
The instructor provided both a telephone interview and a written statement. |
He stated that during taxi, he briefed the student that he would initiate a simulated engine failure during the takeoff roll and the actions the student was to perform. |
The pilot acknowledged, responded to the simulated engine failure as instructed, then initiated a takeoff with “4,400 ft of runway remaining.” The instructor stated that, shortly after becoming airborne, the left engine started losing power and the airplane started yawing.” The instructor stated that he attempted to feather the left engine propeller, but it would not feather. |
He went on to describe a descent he could not arrest and his attempts to maintain aircraft control during the forced landing. |
According to witnesses, their attention was drawn to the airplane during its takeoff roll from runway 22 due to its “unusual” sound that was inconsistent with takeoff power. |
One witness said that he could not discern if one engine or both engines were making “continuous sputtering/backfiring” sounds. |
He said the “obviously abnormal sound drew the attention of many of us out to observe the airplane struggle into the air.” The witness, an airline transport pilot and airframe and powerplant mechanic, stated that the airplane climbed to about 100 ft above ground level while on runway heading and that the landing gear remained extended until the departure end of the runway. |
Shortly thereafter, the airplane entered a shallow left turn and disappeared behind a tree line. |
Another witness described “popping, sputtering, and crackling noises” and said that the airplane was “clearly struggling to climb” when it disappeared from her view. |
The company mechanic who performed the annual inspection on the accident airplane stated that his “maintenance team” stopped work to witness the takeoff. |
He said they often stopped to watch the airplane’s “impressive takeoff abilities” and that they “loved the sound that her engines made.” According to the mechanic, the airplane was normally airborne by the time it was abeam the company hangar on the takeoff roll, but during the accident takeoff, the airplane did not lift off the runway until it was “past the windsock on runway 22.” Based on the pilot’s estimated starting point, the airplane was over 1,400 ft into the takeoff roll when the airplane lifted from the runway. |
At that point, about 3,000 ft of runway and 2,000 ft of grass overrun remained between the airplane and the airport boundary. |
Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) and radar data provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) revealed that the airplane departed from runway 22. |
The airplane achieved a groundspeed of 86 knots about midfield, and once off the ground, slowed, and did not accelerate above 80 knots. |
The track depicted a shallow climb for about 1 mile, where about 200ft agl, the track depicted a descending, decelerating turn to the left. |
The radius of the turn tightened until the last target was recorded in the vicinity of the accident site, about ground level, at 59 knots groundspeed. |
PERSONNEL INFORMATION The instructor held a commercial pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single-engine land, multiengine land, and instrument airplane. |
He held a flight instructor certificate with ratings for airplane single and multiengine. |
The pilot’s multiengine rating was added September 20, 2020. |
The pilot’s most recent FAA first class medical certificate was issued March 2, 2021. |
He reported 1,618 total hours of flight experience, of which 13 hours was in the accident airplane make and model. |
The pilot receiving instruction held a commercial pilot certificate with ratings for rotorcraft-helicopter and instrument helicopter, and private privileges for airplane single-engine land. |
According to an FAA aviation safety inspector, the pilot had accrued 1,200 total hours of flight experience. |