This March 2007 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
Aircraft: Flight Design CT.
Location: Albuquerque.
Injuries: 2 Minor.
Aircraft damage: Substantial.
What reportedly happened: The company’s chief pilot and pilot receiving instruction had performed four successful touch-and-goes. On the fifth landing, the pilot receiving instruction started the flare about 3 feet above the runway. As the airplane settled, the chief pilot raised the nose of the airplane slightly to prevent a bounced landing. The airplane ballooned. The pilots elected to perform a go-around.
The chief pilot advanced the power but the airplane settled back onto the runway in a slight left crab, first touching down on the left main landing gear. The gear collapsed. The airplane slid for 300 feet, went off the side of the pavement and flipped over on to its back.
The post-accident examination determined that the left main lower landing gear tube had fractured due to overstress at the wheel and brake attachment fitting.
Probable cause: The total failure of the left main landing gear strut due to overload during the landing, resulting in the loss of control and subsequent nose over.
For more information: NTSB.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070313X00279&key=1.
I have flown over 150 hours in a 2005 Flight Design CTSW (with the same landing gear as mentioned), and found that transition training is an essential element in moving from “metal” aircraft to carbon fibre Light Sport Aircraft. These aircraft, that weigh at MOST half of the max gross weight of a Cessna 172 or Piper Archer, fly and land much differently–in part due to the LSA maximum stalling speed of 45 knots–from their heavier G/A cousins. (The Vso for the Flight Design CT is 39 knots.)
It appears that this pilot began the transition training process properly–with Flight Design’s chief pilot on board. The pilot in the left seat was probably not YET used to the light control pressure needed on the control stick (it’s not a yoke like in most trainer G/A aircraft) and might have flared the aircraft “mechanically” instead of using the site-picture clues from his/her peripheral vision & using the end of the runway as a guide. It’s easy to do. I did it in the beginning.
Moving from heavy G/A aircraft with stiff yokes and the glide ratio of a filing cabinet to composite “glider-like” aircraft with a control stick that you must “fly to the ground” requires diligent training & practice, practice, practice! This was the pilot’s first attempt, and unfortunately, it didn’t end well.
After the aircraft ballooned, the go-around was the right decision, and the chief pilot’s adding power appeared not to have been in time to prevent the bounce that damaged the left main landing gear strut & led to the aircraft’s damage.
I understand that Flight Design has since improved the design of the landing gear on the CTSW–offering an even stronger “ankle” design (even though it previously exceeded the strength requirements). More importantly, they have eliminated these metal main gear legs on the Flight Design CTLS, replacing them with a composite main gear that dampens the impact much better & absorbs any shock–preventing the bounce in the first place, and facilitating damage-free recovery from botched flares.
I love flying my buddy’s Flight Design CTSW, and actually prefer it to older metal aircraft. But I had to go through the “transition training” and really PRACTICE in order to nail my landings on those hot afternoons with gusty crosswinds. And I ALWAYS keep a “go around” ready, just in case.