Accident Details
Probable Cause and Findings
The pilot's failure to maintain airspeed while turning from the downwind to the base leg of the traffic pattern, which resulted in a subsequent aerodynamic stall, spin, and impact with terrain. Contributing to the accident were the pilot's lack of currency and proficiency in controlling the airplane and his decisions to forego recurrent training and to land on the nontraditional runway.
Aircraft Information
Registered Owner (Historical)
Analysis
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn May 4, 2013, about 1300 eastern daylight time, an experimental light sport S6S, N388KB, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain during an uncontrolled descent near Suffolk Executive Airport (SFQ), Suffolk, Virginia. The private pilot and passenger were fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, which departed Williamsburg-Jamestown Airport (JGG), Williamsburg, Virginia about 1230. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.
According to an acquaintance of the pilot, who was also a light sport airplane flight instructor, he had known the pilot for several years preceding the accident, and had sold the pilot the kit from which he constructed the accident airplane. After the pilot completed construction of his airplane in 2008, the flight instructor flew with him several times. In flying the airplane, the pilot complained that the airplane was "too responsive" compared to the Cessna 172 he was accustomed to flying previously. The pilot subsequently flew the airplane seldom, though the flight instructor was not aware of what the pilot's specific currency level was.
About 2 weeks prior to the accident flight, the pilot advised the flight instructor that he would like to join him and the group of other pilots who planned to fly their similar make/model airplanes from their home base at Cambridge-Dorchester Airport (CGE), Cambridge, Maryland, to SFQ for the fly-in event held there annually. The flight instructor urged the pilot to perform some local currency flights prior to the trip, and offered dual instruction in order to practice takeoffs and landing; however, the pilot did not fly with the flight instructor between that time and the day of the accident. On the morning of the accident, the group of pilots delayed their departure due to the adverse weather conditions prevailing at SFQ. The flight instructor again suggested that he and the accident pilot take the opportunity to practice some takeoffs and landings while visual meteorological conditions prevailed at their home airport. The accident pilot again declined the offer.
The group, including the accident pilot, subsequently departed CGE, and after encountering deteriorating weather conditions, landed at Campbell Field (9VG), Weirwood, Virginia to allow conditions to improve. After landing, the accident pilot advised the flight instructor that he had landed "hard." The pilot subsequently inspected the airplane, and after finding no damage, elected to continue the flight with the group.
The flight subsequently departed 9VG, and after again encountering adverse weather, the group diverted to JGG. A lineman at JGG recalled watching as the flight arrived at the airport. He described that following the first airplane in the group's successful landing, the accident airplane aborted its landing attempt and initiated a go around. The third and fourth airplanes of the group then landed without incident. The lineman described the accident airplane's second approach to the runway as "very erratic," and that the airplane was banking at an angle of about 30 degrees to the right and left and "porpoising" as it landed. Following the landing, the airplane taxied to the ramp where the lineman serviced each of the airplanes with fuel. The accident airplane's left fuel tank was subsequently "topped off" with 5.7 gallons of fuel.
The flight instructor described the wind conditions at JGG about the time of their arrival as "variable and gusty," and another pilot in the group described the wind as "challenging" and that it, "kept you busy." One of the other pilots in the group spoke with the accident pilot regarding his difficulty during the previous two landings. The accident pilot stated that he was having difficulty controlling the airplane with the passenger aboard and that the additional weight was, "throwing him off." After eating lunch, the group departed for SFQ.
An airport advisory service was operating at SFQ, and the three volunteers who staffed the service observed and interacted with the flight via radio as it approached the airport. According to the volunteers, the flight leader initially requested to perform a low pass down the active runway 4. After completing the low pass, one of the airplanes landed on the runway, while the pilots of the remaining airplanes requested to land on an auxiliary turf runway. The first airplane landed uneventfully, but as the accident airplane approached the runway, it entered an aerodynamic stall during the turn from the base leg of the traffic pattern to the final leg of the traffic pattern. The airplane then appeared to recover from the stall and aborted the landing, while the last airplane landed uneventfully.
As the accident airplane approached the runway for a second time, it again appeared to stall during the base-to-final turn. The airplane again recovered from the stall, aborted the landing, and continued in the traffic pattern. During a third traffic pattern circuit, and while turning from the downwind leg to the base leg, the airplane appeared to stall and subsequently entered a spin. The volunteers lost sight of the airplane as it descended behind trees, and immediately began contacting emergency personnel and coordinating a response to the accident. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONThe pilot, age 73, held a private pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single engine land. The pilot's most recent FAA third-class medical certificate was issued on June 17, 2008 with the limitation, "Holder shall wear glasses which correct for near and distant vision while exercising the privileges of his airman certificate."
Review of the pilot's personal flight log showed flight hours logged between the time he began his initial flight training in 1991 and April 2012. During that period the pilot logged 231 total hours of flight experience. Of that time, 185 hours were logged flying almost exclusively Cessna 152, Cessna 172, and Grumman AA5B airplanes, all of which occurred between 1991 and 2002. The pilot subsequently logged 2.2 hours of dual instruction in the accident airplane make model in 2003, and 2.5 hours of dual instruction in 2008. Following the 2008 flight, a flight instructor endorsed the pilot's logbook for satisfactory completion of a flight review. No subsequent endorsements were contained within the log.
Beginning in October 2008, the pilot made numerous flights in the accident airplane after completing its construction. During the remainder of that year the pilot logged 9 total flight hours, all of which were in the accident airplane. In the subsequent years leading to the accident flight, the pilot logged the following flight hours annually: 2009, 18 hours; 2010, 0 hours; 2011, 14.5 hours; 2012, 13 hours. All of the hours logged were in the accident airplane, and included both solo and dual instruction received flight hours. The final log entry was dated April 29, 2012, and no subsequent flight hour entries were recorded. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONThe pilot was the owner and builder of the airplane. Review of the airplane's airworthiness and maintenance records revealed that a special airworthiness certificate and operating limitations as an operating experimental light sport airplane were issued by the FAA on January 28, 2008. According to the maintenance log entry on that date, the next condition inspection of the airplane was due in January 2009. Three subsequent maintenance entries were made between June 2010 and April 2012, detailing replacement of the engine oil and oil filter, replacement of the fuel lines, synchronization of the carburetors, and adjustment of the throttle cables. No other entries were found, nor did any of the entries detail the completion of any condition inspections. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATIONThe weather conditions reported at SFQ, at 1255, included winds from 050 degrees magnetic at 11 knots, gusting to 19 knots, an overcast ceiling at 1,200 feet, 10 statute miles visibility, a temperature of 14 degrees C, a dew point of 12 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 30.00 inches of mercury. AIRPORT INFORMATIONThe pilot was the owner and builder of the airplane. Review of the airplane's airworthiness and maintenance records revealed that a special airworthiness certificate and operating limitations as an operating experimental light sport airplane were issued by the FAA on January 28, 2008. According to the maintenance log entry on that date, the next condition inspection of the airplane was due in January 2009. Three subsequent maintenance entries were made between June 2010 and April 2012, detailing replacement of the engine oil and oil filter, replacement of the fuel lines, synchronization of the carburetors, and adjustment of the throttle cables. No other entries were found, nor did any of the entries detail the completion of any condition inspections. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe wreckage came to rest in a vacant field. The forward portion of the airplane including the engine, firewall, and instrument panel, were displaced aft and were severely crushed. The wings and empennage remained relatively intact with minor impact-related damage. Control continuity was confirmed from the flight control surfaces to each of the primary flight controls. The elevator control tube was separated from its forward attach point consistent with impact, and there was a significant disruption of floor structure directly above the fracture. The flaps appeared retracted and the flap handle was displaced from the flaps retracted position between the first and second detent. The electrically actuated elevator trim tab was deflected slightly trailing edge down.
An undetermined quantity of 100LL fuel was present in both fuel tanks. A sample of fuel appeared blue, and absent of debris or water. There was also a strong smell of fuel at the scene, and there was evidence of fu...
Data Source
Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). For more information on this event, visit the NTSB Records Search website. NTSB# ERA13FA227