Aviation Accident Summaries

Aviation Accident Summary CEN13FA416

Flushing, MI, USA

Aircraft #1

N36466

TAYLORCRAFT BC12-65

Analysis

The flight was an instructional flight with a student pilot and a flight instructor onboard. Video evidence from a ground-based source indicated that the airplane was in a nose-high left turn at a moderate bank angle. As the turn progressed, the airplane appeared to pitch down, and the left bank steepened before the airplane left the frame of the video. The location of the camera indicated that the airplane was making a turn in the traffic pattern from the base leg to the final approach. Examination of the airplane after the accident confirmed continuity of the flight control systems. Engine examination confirmed crankshaft and valve train continuity. Although the magnetos would not produce a spark, impact damage would have prevented normal operation. No preimpact anomalies were detected that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane, engine, or related systems. Based on the available evidence, it is likely that the airplane's airspeed diminished during the turn to a point where the airplane stalled and entered a spin.

Factual Information

HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn July 17, 2013, at 0802 eastern daylight time, a Taylorcraft model BC12-65 airplane, N36466, impacted a wooded area 0.43 miles east-southeast of the approach end of runway 27 while approaching to land at the Dalton Airport (3DA), Flushing, Michigan. The flight instructor and student pilot were fatally injured. The airplane was destroyed. The aircraft was registered to and operated by the Father John 77 Flying Club under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 as an instructional flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which was not operated on a flight plan. The flight originated from 3DA at 0750. Security video from two ground based sources captured portions of the accident flight. The first video source had 4 cameras which captured the airplane's taxi and departure from 3DA, a low level pass over runway 27, and portions of the accident approach. The second video source captured a portion of the accident landing approach. In the second video, the airplane entered the frame of the video and appeared to be in a nose-high left turn at a moderate bank angle. As the turn progressed, the airplane appeared to pitch down and the left bank steepened before the airplane left the frame of the video. Based on the location of the second camera, the airplane was at the approximate position where a traffic pattern turn from the base leg to final approach for runway 27 would have been made. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONThe flight instructor, age 82, held a commercial pilot certificate with single-engine land, single-engine seaplane, multiengine land, instrument airplane, and glider ratings. He also held a flight instructor certificate with single-engine airplane, and instrument airplane ratings. He was issued a second-class medical certificate, with a restriction for corrective lenses, on May 8, 2012. The flight instructor had logged about 9,853.6 hours total flight time. During the previous year he had logged 245.6 hours of flight time which included 221.6 hours of instruction given and 83.6 hours in the accident airplane. The flight instructor's logbook included an endorsement for a flight review, as required by 14 CFR 61.56, dated May 19, 2012. The student pilot had not yet acquired a student pilot certificate or medical certificate. According to the flight instructor's logbook, the student's first training flight was on June 25, 2013, and he had accumulated 6.7 hours of flight time prior to the accident flight. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONThe accident airplane was a Taylorcraft model BC12-65, serial number 3288. It was a two-place, high wing, single engine airplane, with a conventional (taildragger) landing gear configuration. The airplane construction consisted of a welded steel tube fuselage and tail surfaces, wood wings, and fabric covering. The airplane was powered by a 65-horsepower Continental Motors A-65-8 four-cylinder, reciprocating engine, serial number 4964668. The airframe had accumulated 4,278.7 hours total time in-service at the time of the accident. The airplane's engine had accumulated 2,476.7 total hours and 1,245.7 hours since its most recent overhaul. Maintenance records indicated that the most recent annual inspection was completed on May 31, 2013, at 4,241.59 hours airframe time. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATIONWeather conditions recorded by the Bishop International Airport (FNT) Automated Weather Observing System (ASOS), located about 6 miles southeast of the accident site, at 0753, were: wind from 240 degrees at 4 knots, visibility 8 miles, clear skies, temperature 26 degrees Celsius, dew point 22 degrees Celsius, and altimeter 30.29 inches of mercury. AIRPORT INFORMATIONThe accident airplane was a Taylorcraft model BC12-65, serial number 3288. It was a two-place, high wing, single engine airplane, with a conventional (taildragger) landing gear configuration. The airplane construction consisted of a welded steel tube fuselage and tail surfaces, wood wings, and fabric covering. The airplane was powered by a 65-horsepower Continental Motors A-65-8 four-cylinder, reciprocating engine, serial number 4964668. The airframe had accumulated 4,278.7 hours total time in-service at the time of the accident. The airplane's engine had accumulated 2,476.7 total hours and 1,245.7 hours since its most recent overhaul. Maintenance records indicated that the most recent annual inspection was completed on May 31, 2013, at 4,241.59 hours airframe time. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe airplane impacted a wooded area about 0.43 miles east-southeast of the approach end of runway 27 at 3DA. The airplane came to rest with the tail in a near vertical position. The tail surfaces and fuselage aft of the cabin were not damaged. The engine and forward fuselage were pushed rearward. The left wing was predominately intact with rearward crushing of the outboard leading edge. The left aileron remained attached to the wing. The right wing was broken about mid-span. There was rearward crushing along the wing's leading edge. The header fuel tank was split open and the wing fuel tanks did not contain any fuel. The airplane's control system was examined on-scene. Several cables had been cut in order to provide access during victim extraction. Except for the cut cables, the control cabling was intact from the controls in the cockpit to the respective control surfaces on the wings and tail. The engine was examined after the wreckage was removed from the accident site. The propeller flange on the crankshaft was bent rearward and the propeller mounting bolts prevented crankshaft rotation. Following removal of the propeller mounting bolts, the crankshaft was free to rotate. Compression and suction were verified on all cylinders. Valve train continuity was verified as was accessory gear rotation. The magnetos exhibited impact damage and did not produce spark. Disassembly of the magnetos revealed, in one case, displacement of the ignition coil, and in the other case, fracturing of the point insulator block. In both instances, the damage was consistent with impact damage. The carburetor mounting flange had separated from the carburetor. The throttle plate operated freely and the carburetor bowl was clean with no debris. The float and float needle operated with no anomalies noted. The carburetor inlet screen contained a minimal amount of debris and was not obstructed. No preimpact anomalies were detected that would have prevented normal operation of the airplane, engine or related systems. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATIONAutopsies were performed on both the flight instructor and the student pilot. In both cases, the cause of death was attributed to multiple blunt force injuries. Toxicology testing was performed on samples from the flight instructor and student pilot. In both cases, the tests were negative for all substances in the screening profile.

Probable Cause and Findings

The student pilot’s failure to maintain airspeed during the landing approach, which led to a stall/spin, and the flight instructor’s failure to monitor the approach and provide remedial action before the stall.

 

Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database

Get all the details on your iPhone or iPad with:

Aviation Accidents App

In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports