Aircraft: Cessna 175. Injuries: None. Location: Spearfish, S.D. Aircraft damage: Destroyed.
What reportedly happened: The pilot thought the airplane was too fast and too high on the first approach to the private airstrip, so he elected to perform a go-around.
During the second approach, the plane encountered a crosswind, and he decided to abort the landing. He applied power, lowered the flaps and pitched for a climb.
While maneuvering, the airplane encountered a downdraft and rising terrain. He decided to abort the go-around and land.
The airplane hit a roadway berm, which tore off the landing gear. The airplane came to rest upright and caught fire.
The pilot and passenger exited the airplane and the pilot attempted to extinguish the fire, but was unsuccessful, and the airplane was destroyed.
Probable cause: The pilot’s delayed decision to abandon the landing attempt, which resulted in the airplane colliding with rising terrain.
NTSB Identification: CEN12CA658
This August 2012 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.
This checklist(http://www.sunrisesheep.com/N9248B/CheckList_Cessna175a_d1.pdf) is similar to the checklists for balked landings (go around) for the C172, C182, and other SEL production aircraft I’ve flown. The landing checklist for this aircraft calls for FLAPS Full down at 40 deg.
THROTTLE Full
CARB HEAT Off
ESTABLISH Climb attitude (10 deg)
FLAPS Raised to 20 degrees (immediately-assuming full flaps of 40 deg are used for short and soft landing)
AIRSPEED 63 mph Established
FLAPS reduce to 10 Deg (until obstacles cleared)
FLAPS Retract at 70mph.
We were not there, that considered a different option could be this.
1. Encountered crosswind. Gusty wind in rising terrain the wind may have changed direction from the first approach.
2. Lower the flaps. I agree seems strange but, Paul may be correct it may be recommended practice under the altitude conditions for “best angle”.
3. While maneuvering. Remember the rising terrain, I don’t deal with big hills/mountains but have had to maneuver around 80′ trees on take-off from back county strips.
4. Encountered a down draft. Again remember the rising terrain, mountain wave winds could easily cause this. Slow speed while trying to climb would aggravate this because you stay in the descending air longer.
5.Abort the go around. If what is being done isn’t working do something else. In this case land off-airport.
6. The fire is reported as small, no harm in trying.
7. Probable cause delayed decision, yes. Cause “failure to control the airplane during landing, no, the last thing this pilot did in the airplane was to fly into the ground. They contacted the ground under control and walked away.
The pilot likely did not know or understand all the factors affecting the attempted landing, just as we do not know all conditions, environmental or in the airplane either. The key often is to not give up, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible, this pilot did that.
1. Plane encountered a crosswind?
Wasn’t the crosswind there all the time that needed to be compensated for – probably
2. Lowered the flaps for a go-around?
That doesn’t seem right – how about raising them or leaving them alone how about it
3. While maneuvering?
Maneuvering on a go-around doesn’t seem right – how about straight ahead
4. Encountered a downdraft?
Doubtful – the airplane was probably stalling
5. Abort the go-around?
Making up ones mind seems to be a problem – go – no go – go no go
6. Tried to extinguish the fire?
Without an adequate fire extinguisher it would be best to get away from the fire in case of an explosion
7. Probable cause delayed decision to abort?
No – the probable cause was failure to control the airplane during landing
Extending flaps on a go around? 10-15 degrees maybe, otherwise I fail to see the advantage if any that would provide.