Loss of Control in Flight · NTSB ERA15FA203
CESSNA 172 — Penn Yan, NY
| Date | May 3, 2015 |
| Location | Penn Yan, NY |
| Aircraft | CESSNA 172 |
| Purpose of flight | Personal |
| Conditions | Day · Visual Meteorological Cond |
| Phase / occurrence | Uncontrolled descent Collision with terr/obj (non-CFIT) |
| Pilot age | 55 |
| Pilot total time | 40 hrs · Student / very low time |
| Time in type | 40 hrs |
| Fatalities | 1 |
Probable cause
NTSB findings
- Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Student/instructed pilot - C
- Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-(general)-Not attained/maintained - C
- Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Use of equip/system-Pilot - F
- Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Flight control system-TE flap actuator-Incorrect use/operation - F
What happened
On the morning of the accident, the student pilot departed from his home airport and flew to two other airports before returning to his home airport. None of these cross-country flights were conducted under the supervision of a flight instructor nor was there any documentation available to show that the student was endorsed to conduct these flights. Upon reaching his home airport, the student pilot entered the traffic pattern to land on the 5,500-ft-long runway with a prevailing right quartering tailwind. A pilot-rated witness reported that he saw the airplane approach the runway "high and fast," that it was about 100 to 150 ft above the ground as it crossed over the runway threshold, and that it then appeared to "float" down the runway. He then lost sight of the airplane. Another witness noted that, after touching down near the midpoint of the runway, the airplane lifted off and reached about 50 ft above the ground, at which point, the engine power increased. The airplane then began climbing steeply and then banked left, making an arcing flightpath that continued to ground contact. Based on available evidence, the investigation was unable to determine whether the pilot was attempting to conduct a go-around following the previous landing approach, or was conducting a touch-and-go landing when the accident occurred.
Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Although fuel drained from the airplane after the accident contained water, witness statements and wreckage signatures were consistent with the engine operating normally to ground impact. The flaps were found extended 40°; however, airplane manufacturer guidance stated that during a go-around climb, the "flap setting should be reduced to 20° immediately after full power is applied" and that "flap settings of 30° to 40° are not recommended at any time for takeoff." It is likely that the inappropriate flap setting for the initial climb contributed to the student pilot's failure to maintain airplane control.
Although the student pilot's autopsy identified the presence of coronary artery disease that could have caused acute symptoms such as chest pain, shortness of breath, palpitations, or fainting, there was no evidence of any such event occurring.