Loss of Control in Flight · NTSB CEN20LA179
Cessna P210 — Burlington, WI
| Date | May 15, 2020 |
| Location | Burlington, WI |
| Aircraft | Cessna P210 |
| Purpose of flight | Personal |
| Conditions | Day · Visual Meteorological Cond |
| Phase / occurrence | Approach Collision with terr/obj (non-CFIT) |
| Pilot age | 80 |
| Pilot total time | 15,000 hrs · High time |
| Time in type | Unknown |
| Fatalities | 1 |
Probable cause
NTSB findings
- Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Electrical power system-Alternator-generator drive sys-Unknown/Not determined
- Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Pilot
- Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Altitude-Not attained/maintained
- Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Descent/approach/glide path-Not attained/maintained
What happened
After the replacement of an alternator belt that had failed on the previous flight, the pilot departed the airport; however, elected to return. While maneuvering in the traffic pattern about three minutes before the accident, the pilot, via his cellular phone, attempted to call the mechanic who replaced the alternator belt. A review of flight track data and witness information revealed that the airplane remained in the traffic pattern after taking off and that during the final approach, the airplane was at a low altitude and low airspeed. Witnesses observed the airplane stall and impact trees and terrain short of the runway.
Witness accounts and impact signatures to the forward fuselage were indicative of a nose-low, low energy impact consistent with an aerodynamic stall.
Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed the replaced alternator belt was displaced from the engine driven pulley and the alternator and was found lying near the back and bottom of the engine. Although this condition would affect the airplane’s electrical system, the displaced belt would not affect the engine power performance. No other mechanical malfunctions were noted with the airframe and engine that would have precluded normal operation.
Based on the autopsy findings and medical certification files, the pilot had several cardiovascular conditions that could result in sudden incapacitation; however, the operational findings did not suggest any sudden incapacitation or impairment. The pilot appeared to have made some good judgements about returning to the airport when he discovered an issue with his airplane. Thus, the pilot’s medical conditions and use of medications detected on toxicology testing were unlikely to have been factors in this accident.
Given the available information, it is likely the pilot was returning to the airport after an alternator malfunction. During the final approach to the runway, the pilot did not maintain control of the airplane, at an already low altitude, and the airplane impacted trees and terrain on short final approach.